*      JUL  17  1922      * 


GOSPEL  HISTO 


A    SYLLABUS 


.        / 
Professor  C.  W.  Hodge's  Gospel  History, 


PRINTED— NOT   PUBLISHED — EXCLUSIVELY 
KOR    rHE  USE  OF  STUDENTS  OF  THE 


MIDDLE  CLA.^y  IN  PiilNCETON  SPLMINARY 


[Prepared  by  the  Class  of  '77. 


PRINCETON: 

CHARLES    S.    ROmXSON,   PRINTER. 
1876. 


Entered,  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1876,  by 
C.  W.  HODGE, 
In  the  office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at  Washington. 


/i 


PREFACE. 


riiis  volume  originated  in  tiie  desire  to  liave  in  more  permanent  and 
satisfactory  form,  than  the  meager  pencil-scratches  of  any  ordinary  set  ol 
notes,  the  substance  of  a  highly- valued  course  of  lectures.  And  it  is  but 
just  to  say  that  Professor  Hodge  is  responsible  for  nothing  here  printed, 
since  his  manuscript  was  not  consulted,  and  no  part  of  the  work  was 
supervised  by  him.  It  may  also  be  added  that  this  Syllabus  is  not 
intended  to  be  well  under.stood  except  in  connection  with  the  full  Lectures 
in  the  class-room,  and  also  in  connection  with  Robinson's  Harmony  and 
the  small  syllabus. 

The  preparation  of  these  notes  has  been  a  very  laborious  task,  so  much 
so  that  the  editors  have  no  expectation  that  their  labor  and  pains  will  be 
adequately  appreciated.  But  before  any  one  indulges  in  wholesale  criti- 
cism, let  him  Jirst  sit  do-wn  and  prepare,  from  the  various  sources,  the 
nninuscript  for  only  five  of  these  printed  pages,  taking  special  pains  to 
look  up  the  different  authorities  and  hunt  down  the  various  references. 
1  hen  let  him  remember  that  all  this  work  had  to  be  done  in  addition  to 
the  regular,  and  in  some  cases  the  extra,  duties  of  the  Seminary  course. 
'I'o  any  student  who  will  comply  with  these  two  conditions,  the  editors 
herewith  give  full  permiision  to  cut  and  slash  to  his  heart's  content. 

ABBREVIATION.S. 


Alf 

for 

Alford. 

Rob. 

for 

Robinson. 

Ell. 

Ellicotl. 

San. 

Sanhedrim. 

Gal. 

Galilee. 

Syn.,  Syi 

IS.    '■ 

Synoptists. 

.ierus. 

.lerusalem. 

Tisch.  ' 

Tischendorf 

Lich. 

Lichtenstein. 

Wies. 

Wieseler. 

The  other  abbreviations  will  be  readily  understood  by  the  reader 
Phinceton  Seminauy,  FfB.  '25th.  187tj. 


SYLLABUS  OF  GOSPEL  HISTORY. 


CHROXOLOGY. 

1.  Rationalists  attempt  to  overthrow  date  of  the  Gos- 
pels, on  external  grounds  ;  they  give  a  later  date. 

2.  Alleged  discrepancies  of  the  gospels  are  exagger- 
ated. Two  kinds :  general,  in  which  a  difterent  character  of 
Christ  is  presented;  special,  one  gospel  heing  supposed  to 
contradict  another.  If  we  can  trace  a  gradual  historical 
growth  from  beginning  to  end,  v/e  have  in  this  unity  of 
the  gospels,  most  effective  answer  to  opponents.  Birth- 
place of  Christ  is  beyond  question,  but  the  date  of  birth 
is  unknown.  It  is  assigned  to  753,  751,  750  (C.  W.  H.) 
749  (Rob.)  748  (Kepler)  747 (Ideler).  No  one  is  at  liberty  to 
dogmatize  where  there  is  so  much  diversity  of  opinion. 
Give  gospels  benefit  of  their  own  reticence.  It  does  not 
vitiate  their  historical  value.  The  Passion  is  variously  as- 
signed between  781  —  790.  Positive  chronology  is  the 
particular  date.  Relative  chronolog}'  is  tiie  relation  of 
events  to  one  another,  their  succession.  Absence  of 
chronological  precision  shows  it  was  not  essential  to  the 
plan  of  "the  writer.  It  seldom  disturbs  the  order; 
Matt,  and  Mark  are  less  regular  than  Lk.  and  Jno.  The 
vear  and  the  day  of  the  nativity  are  to  be  determined. 
'Present  era  was  fixed  in  the  6th  century  by  Dionysius,  a 
Scythian  monk  who  flourished  in  Rome  553 — 556  A.  D. 
He  assumed  that  year  of  Christ's  birth  was  coincident 
with  754.  If  750  "be  the  correct  date,  our  era  begins  4 
years  too  late.  This  era  was  1st  used  in  historical  works 
by  Venerable  Bede,' early  in  the  8th  century,  afterward 
was  introduced  in  public  tiansactions  by  Frank  kings, 
Pepin  and  Charlemaiine.     Gospels  give  4  data  : 

(1.)  Time  of  Herod  the  Great,  Matt,  2:  1,  Lk  1  :  5. 
(2.)  Census  in  Judea  under  Augustus,  Lk  2  :  1. 
(3.)  Star  of  the  Magi,  Matt.  2. 

(4.)  Age  of  Christ  when  beginning  public  ministry, 
Lk  3  :  23^ 


Josephus(Ant.  17  :  8  :  1):  "Horod  died,  the  5th  day  after 
he  had  caused  Antipater  to  be  slain,  having  reigned,  since 
he  had  caused  Antigonus  to  be  shiin,  34  years  ;  but  since 
he  had  been  decUired  king  by  the  Romans,  87."  (Ant, 
17  :  6  :  4) :  "  Herod  deprived  Matthias  of  the  higli-priest- 
hood,  and  burnt  the  other  Matthias,  who  had  raised  the 
sedition,  with  his  companions,  alive.  And  that  very 
night  there  was  an  eclipse  of  the  moon."  Now  Herod 
was  declared  king  in  714;  therefore  his  death  would  be 
from  1st  Nisan  750  to  1st  ISTisan  751,  ace.  to  Jewisli  com- 
putation, at  age  of  70.  Astronomical  investigation  places 
this  eclipse  on  the  night  of  12th  and  13th  of  March  750. 
He  was  dead  before  the  5th  of  April,  because  the  Pass- 
over of  that  year  fell  on  12th  of  April,  and  Josephus 
(Ant.  17:  8:  4)  states  that  before  this  feast,  his  son  and 
successor  Archelaus,  observed  the  usual  7  days'  mourn- 
ing for  the  dead.  His  death,  therefore,  must  be  placed 
between  13th  March  and  April  4th,  750,  (Andrews). 
How  long  before  Herod's  death  was  the  Lord  born  ? 
M,att.  and  Lk.  relate  events  that  occurred  between  his 
birth  and  Herod's  death  ;  circumcision,  presentation  in 
temple,  visit  of  Mfigi,  flight  into  Egypt,  murder  of  Inno- 
cents. Whatever  view  may  be  taken  as  to  order  of  these 
events,  they  can  scarcely  have  occupied  less  than  two 
months.  This  would  bring  his  birth  into  Jan.  or  Feb.  at 
latest,  750. 

Luke  2:  1-2;  a  all  the  world  should  be  taxed. 

h  the  taxing  was  first  made  when  Cyre- 
nius  was  governor  of  Syria. 

OBJECTIONS    URGED. 

I.  No  such  universal  taxing  under  Augustus  on  record; 
the  censuses  of  contemporary  liistory  are  local ;  a  clear 
case  of  inaccuracy,  say  the  skeptics.  Ay\s.  :  It  is  known 
from  Suetonius  and  Ancyrian  monument,  that  Augustus 
three  times  instituted  a  census,  in  726,  746,  and  767. 
The  second  only  needs  to  be  considered.  It  appears  to 
have  been  a  census  cwium,  confined  to  cives  Romani,  and 
not  to  have  extended  to  the  provinces  ;  cannot,  therefore, 
have  been  the  taxing  of  Lk.  Some  restrict  otxau/isvY^ 
to  Palestine  or  Syria.     It  would  be  improbable  and  un- 


natural  for  Lnke  to  make  this  restriction.  A  better  an- 
swer is,  that  if  Lk.  mentions  the  census,  that  is  enoiiah. 
Other  answers  :  1.  The  omission  of  contemporaries  has  its 
analog^-;  an  argument  from  silence  is  never  conclusive. 
Various  laws  were  established,  of  which  we  are  informed 
b}^  no  historians,  but  by  monuments.  In  year  of  Coesar'a 
death,  there  was  a  geographical  survey  of  Rome,  but  his- 
toriaiisdo  not  tell  us  of  it.  Ancient  historians  omit  to 
give  a  complete  list  of  governors  of  the  provinces.  On 
this  period,  Suetonius  and  Tacitus  are  very  brief.  This 
argument  from  silence,  if  pushed,  would  compel  us  to 
believe  that  no  important  event  took  place  in  the  long 
reign  of  Augustus,  of  which  the  few  historians  whose 
works  remain  have  not  made  specitic  mention.  2.  Prob- 
ably the  censuses  referred  to  on  tlie  Ancyrian  marbles 
were  confined  to  Italy,  and  did  not  extend  to  the  Provin- 
ces. But  beyond  question,  the  census  did  at  times  ex- 
tend to  particular  provinces.  3.  A  considerable  gap  oc- 
curs here  in  Dion  Cassius  (Roman  historian);  from  747 
to  757,  the  very  period  in  which  Lk.  says  the  taxing  was 
made.  4.  In  Joseph  us  the  names  of  several  who  were 
governors  of  Syria  al)ont  time  of  Lord's  bii-th  are  men- 
tioned, but  only  incidentally,  nor  is  the  list  complete. 
•  Being  a  professed  Roman  flatterer,  be  leaves  out  all  that 
might  excite  the  discontent  of  Jewish  readers.  He  passes 
over  as  lightly  as  possible  whatever  testifies  to  degrada- 
tion of  his  people. 

A  positice  argument  is  tJiis  :  In  time  of  Augustus,  there 
was  strong  tendency  to  centralization,  and  establishment 
of  the  military  power.  Tioerius  read  in  Senate  an  auto- 
graph MS.  letter  of  Augustus's,  which  showed  resources 
of  the  empire,  how  many  soldiers  could  be  raised  and 
how  much  money  they  could  give.  How  did  he  know, 
unless  he  had  tried  it?  The  citizens  of  Ancyra  had 
marble  copies  made  of  bronze  tablets  in  which  he  re- 
corded the  chief  events  of  his  life.  In  these  he  declares 
he  made  a  census  of  Roman  citizens  four  times  ;  shows 
that  he  was  doing  this  kind  of  work  and  confirms  Lk.  in- 
directly. Cassiodorus  says  that  a  careful  survey  was 
made  in  all  provinces  where  Roman  sovereignty  extended, 
that  there  were  enrolment  lists.     His  authority  of  itself 


would  linve  no  o'lv at  weight;  but  he  may  have  read 
many  works  unknown  to  us,  on  this  period.  Momnisen 
doubts  his  statement,  but  Zumpt  aecei)t8  it.  "  Being  a 
Christian,  he  might  have  drawn  his  information  from 
Lk."  (Lange).  Suidas :  "Augustus  sent  out  twenty 
men  of  great  probity  into  all  jiarts  of  the  empire,  by 
whom  In"  made  an  assessment  of  persons  and  estates;" 
has  no  intrinsic  improbability,  but  is  unsupported.  Sui- 
das, like  Cassiod(U'us,  was  a  Christian. 

Indirect  Proofs. — 1.  Under  the  Republic,  each  prov- 
ince retained  its  own  mode  of  taking  census,  and  under 
the  Antonines,  there  was  a  regular  land  tax. 

2.  Exemption  from  land  tax  in  Italy  (by  jus  Italicum) 
began  with  Augustus.  The  exception  proves  rule.  The 
land  and  poll  tax  under  Pompey  must  have  been  in  full 
force,  which  presupposes  a  census.  Here  again  is  a  diffi- 
culty.    When  was  the  census  made? 

li.  Palestine  was  not  yet  a  Roman  province  ;  a  Roman 
census  was  ordered  during  reign  of  Herod  Great.  But 
Herod  was  a  rex  sodas,  \vho  had  to  pay  tribute  to  the 
Romans  ;  and  then,  this  census  may  have  been  for  statis- 
tical and  military  purposes,  as  in  the  decennial  census  of 
U.  S.  Jews  were  first  compelled  to  pay  tribute  to  Rome 
in  time  of  Pompey.  From  time  of  Julius  Ctesar,  certain 
tributes  were  levied  in  Judea  for  Rome. 

III.  Cyrenius  was  Governor  of  Syria  for  10  years  after 
the  nativity,  and  made  a  registration  of  inhabitants,  Acts 
5  :  37.  The  trouble  is,  to  "find  room  for  another  census 
in  Palestine  under  same  Cyrenius  and  at  time  of  Christ's 
birth.  Tholuck:  "This  enrolment  took  place  before 
{7:f)iurfj)  Cyrenius  was  gov.  of  Syria  ;  izinoTq  in  compara- 
tive sense  as  John  1 :  15.  This  solution  is  not  impossible 
grammatically.  The  taxing  in  question  was  1st,  as  dis- 
tinguished from  2d,  whicii  took  place  during  h  s  2d 
administration.  Neander  takes  /^j-s/ioysyoi/Toc  i"  wide 
sense  of  "leader  ;"  is  confirmed  by  Tacitus  who  says  this 
man  was  thus  employed.  Ebrard  :  o-oytxurq  means  reg- 
istration as  well  as  taxation,  anoyixn^ri  has  a  double  sense  : 
(«)  transcription,  (6)  enrolment.  If  passage  be  read,  this 
was  1st  taxing,  in  distinction  from  2d,  and  took  place 
under  him  as  governor  of  Syria,  but  in  fact  he  was  not 


3'et  an  interregnum  of  several  weeks  of  dry  weather  gen- 
erally occurs  between  middle  of  Dec,  and  of  Feii.,  some- 
what distinguishing  the  former  rains  of  tlie  season  from 
the  latter.  Lightfoot  :  "  The  spring  coming  on,  they 
drove  the  beasts  into  wildernesses,  or  champaign  grounds, 
where  they  fed  them  the  whole  summer.  The  winter 
coming  on,  they  betook  themselves  home  again  with  the 
flocks  and  herds."  The  climate  of  Bethlehem  is  not  un- 
like that  of  Jeriis.,  though  milder.  Shephei-ds  could 
have  been  pasturing  their  flocks  in  Dec.  Barclay  : 
"in  tliis  month  the  earth  is  fully  clothed  with  ricli  ver- 
dure, and  there  is  generally  an  interval  of  dry  weather 
between  middle  of  Dec.  and  of  Feb."  (Andrews,  32-35). 
Abia's  course  was  8th  in  tiie  24.  At  destimction  of  tern- 
jde  by  Titus  on  Aug.  5,  823,  the  1st  class  had  just  en- 
tered on  its  course.  Its  period  of  service  was  from  the 
evening  of  the  4th  of  Aug.,  which  was  the  Sabbalh,  to 
the  evening  of  following  Sabbath,  Aug.  11th.  We  can 
now  easily  compute  backward  and  ascertain  at  what  time 
in  any  given  year  each  class  was  officiating. 

Date  of  the  Crucifixion. — Lk.  23  :  54  ;  Mk.  15  :  42  ; 
Mtt.  27:  62.  TianafTxsoYj  was  common  designation  of  6th 
day  of  the  week.  The  Sabbath  occurring  on  2d  day  of 
the  feast,  the  1st  feast  day  became  the  preparation,  the 
day  before  the  Sabbath.  1.  That  nanaa/.vn^  might  not  l)e 
apprehended  as  the  weekly  one,  referable  to  the  Sabbath, 
but  be  regarded  as  connected  with  the  feast  day  of  tlie 
Pass.,  Jno.  expressly  adds  rob  Tzdaya  (19  :  14).  2.  -anaa- 
xeuTj — Friday  in  the  passover  season,  or  paschal  week,  as 
a  day  of  preparation  for  the  Sabbath.  The  true  refer- 
ence is  to  the  paschal  feast,  coming  in  on  the  evening  of 
the  day,  of  which  feast  the  first  day  fell,  according  to 
John,  upon  the  Sabbath. 

Day  of  Month.  —  Crucifixion  was  14th  or  15th  Nisan. 
Was  the  last  meal  of  Christ  with  his  disciples,  tlie  regu- 
lar Passover  supper  or  did  it  anticipate  it  ?  Ans.  The 
paschal  lamb  was  usually  killed  14tli  Is^isan  and  eaten 
same  evening.  The  meal,  therefore,  was  on  preparatioii 
day,  Thursday,  Nisan  14th,  and  the  crucifixion  on  Fri- 
dny,  Nisan  15th.  (Mk  14:  12;  Lk  22:  7)).  According 
to  Synopts.,   the  supper  was  the  regular  Passover.     But 


10 

•John  calls  it  the  preparation  of  the  Passover  (19:  14); 
speaks  as  ifthe  paschal  supper  was  legally  upon  the  even- 
ing of  Friday,  and  consequently  the  Lord,  who  ate  it 
upon  the  evening  of  Thursday,  ate  it  hefore  the  time. 
4  apparently  discrepant  references  :  1.  John  nowhere 
calls  it  the  Passover.  "  Out  of  9  times  in  which  7ida-^a 
is  used  hy  John,  in  6  it  is  applied  to  the  feast  generally, 
and  not  to  paschal  supper  onl}'.  The  meaning  in  the 
other  3  is  in  dispute."  (Andrews).  2.  Jno.  13  :  1—"  Be- 
fore the  feast  ot  the  passover."  Does  this  refer  to  the 
supper  of  verse  2  ?  Tiibingen  critics  say  yes.  Therefore 
it  must  have  been  a  supper  of  a  private  nature,  and  not 
the  Passover  meal  which  it  preceded;  and  according  to 
John,  Jesus  never  ate  the  Passover,  but  only  a  private 
meal  beforehand.  Being  crucified  next  day,  it  must  have 
been  on  Thursday,  thus  directly'  contradicting  Synopts, 
who  make  it  fall  on  Friday.  But  the  clause  does  not 
refer  to  the  supper  of  verse  2  ;  it  refers  to  what  immedi- 
ately follows,  "  that  Jesus  knew  that  his  hour  was  come." 
He  knew  it  beforehand. 

3.  Jno.  18  :  28 — They  themselves  went  not  in,  lest  they 
should  be  defiled  ;  that  they  miglit  eat  the  passover. 
Held  :  that  on  day  of  crucifixion,  Passover  was  not  yet 
eaten.  As  it  was  not  eaten  before  6  o'clock,  i.  e.  at  be- 
ginning of  next  day  (the  Jews'  day  commenced  at  even- 
ing) the  defilement  incurred  in  the  morning  would  have 
ceased  before  the  regular  Passover.  Probably  "  eat  the 
Passover  "  is  used  here  in  more  general  sense  of  keeping 
the  paschal  feast,  and  is  not  confined  to  eating  of  the 
lamb.  Their  scruple  could  have  had  reference  only  to 
the  paschal  sacrifices  ofiered  during  the  same  day  before 
evening. 

4.  Jno.  (19:  14,  16)  calls  crucifixion  day  tlie  prepara- 
tion of  the  Passover.  The  point  at  issue  decides  the  gen- 
uineness of  John's  gospel. 

4  methods  of  meeting  the  difliculty  : 

1.  Some  follow  John,  as  most  accurate,  and  allow  that 
the  others  made  a  mistake.  Reasoning  :  Jno.  was  an 
apostle,  an  eye-witness,  and  his  gospel  written  last ;  there- 
fore he  would  cori'cct  their  mistakes.  Bleek  holds  that 
Christ  anticipated  regular  time  of  Passover ;  he  trans- 
lates Jno.  13:  1 — "Before   tlie  feast,  when  Jesus  knew 


11 

tliut  his  hour  was  come  to  depart  out  of  this  world  unto 
the  Father,  having  loved  His  own  who  were  in  the  world 
(Ho  did  love  thorn  unto  the  end),  when  a  repast  was  spread 
(or  during  supper),"  &c.  The  sentence  thus  formed  is 
intricate,  unlike  John's  usual  manner,  and  without  ne- 
cessity. 

2.  Some  endeavor  to  reconcile  Synopts.  and  John  hy  ex- 
plaining away  the  Synoptical  forms.  JSTo  success.  The 
Synoptics  are  explicit. 

3.  Kationalists.(Bretschneider,  Baur,  Davidson),  uphold 
the  sj^noptical  account  vs.  John,  maintain  the  former  is 
true  history  and  John  not  genuine,  think  John  wrote  with 
dogmatic  intent,  not  historicallj-,  and  that  the  error  shows 
lie  could  not  have  been  an  eye-witness  as  he  claims. 

4.  Ilengst.,  Wiesel.,  Rob.,  (215-222)  and  a  majority  of 
harmonists  hold  that  synoptical  accounts  can  be  made  to 
harmonize  with  John.  John  nowhere  calls  the  meal  a 
Passover,  and  this  has  negative  weight.  But  omits  Lord's 
Supper,  and  that  does  not  warrant  the  conclusion  that  no 
such  rite  was  instituted.  He  omits  other  things  design- 
edly-, because  he  possessed  theSynoptists.  The  omission 
is  a  tacit  reference  to  what  they  had  written,  and  what 
needed  no  repetition.     Tlius  answer  1st  objection. 

The  2d,  by  making  -[ib  r-^c  eoprr^^  qualify  ecd(6^,  or  ec^ 
zeAoz  ijd-Tjatv.  If  £«o<:«;c,  the  sense  is  :  "Jesus,  knowing 
before  the  festi\alof  the  Passover,  that  his  hour  was 
come,"  &c.  In  this  way  the  passage  has  no  bearing  upon 
the  present  question.  If  e^V  tsIoz  iffajz-qazv^  it  is  equiva- 
lent to  festival-eve,  and  here  marks  the  evening  immedi- 
ately before  the  kooz-q  or  festival  proper,  on  which  eve, 
during  supper,  our  Lord  manifested  his  love  to  his  dis- 
ciples" by  washing  their  feet.  The  3d  (18  :  28),  by  extend- 
ing meaning  ot  TLaaya.  to  paschal  festival,  and  remember- 
ing that  "eating  the  passover "  meant  not  merely  the 
paschal  lamb  of  the  evening  before,  but  sacrifices  and 
unleavened  bread  of  the  whole  Passover  week.  The  4th 
(19 :  14),  by  interpreting  Traoo.axvjYj  as  referringto  the  Jew- 
ish Sabbath,  which  actually  occurred  next  day.  It  was 
Friday  in  the  passover  season  or  paschal  week. 

Bleek's  Argumbnt.— 1.  According  to  John's  account 
(19  :  81)  15th  Nisan,  the  great- day  of  the  feast  coincided 
that  year  \\\t\i  i\\Q  weekly  Sabbath,  (our  Saturday);   and 


12 

the  day  before  (i.  e.  the  Friday)  wonhl  he  tlie  preparation 
day  both  for  the  weekly  Sabbath  and  for  tlie  2:reat  feast 
day.  He  argues  (a)  that  the  Sanhedrim  would  not  have 
sent  an  armed  band  vs.  Jesus  on  the  holy  night  after  the 
eating  of  the  Passover,  because  it  was  expressly  forbid- 
den to  carry  arms  on  the  Sabbath  ;  (6)  that  on  such  a  night 
the  Sanhedrim  would  not  have  sat  in  council  to  judge- 
Jesus,  for  to  hold  a  court  of  judgment  on  the  Sabbath 
was  expressly  forbidden  ;  that  crucitixion  could  not  take 
place  Nisan  'l5th,  for  it  must  have  been,  a  glaring  viola- 
tion of  the  Sabbatical  rest  of  the  day,  according  to  Jew- 
isl)  notions  still  in  vogue.  Yet  Bleek  admits  that  crimi- 
nals were  often  arrested  on  the  Sabbath,  and  of  course,  if 
necessary,  by  men  bearing  arms.  In  oi»position  to  Bleek: 
tlie  strict  Sabbatical  law  was  not  applicable  to  the  feast 
Sabbath.  Besides  fanatics  would  have  caused  them  to  kill 
Christ,  whenever  they  had  opportunity.  (Lk.  23:  2,  18). 
If  the  law  did  govern  feast  Sabbath,  the  hatred  of  tlie 
Jews  made  them  break  the  law.     (Andrews,  457). 

2.  Luke  23  :  26,  27,  we  read  tliat  Galilean  women, 
when  they  returned  from  the  sepulchre,  prepared  spices, 
and  rested  the  Sabbath  day  according  to  the  command- 
ment, and  returned  again  to  the  sepulchre  when  Sabbath 
was  past.  Now  it  would  have  been  illegal  for  them  to 
have  prepared  the  spices  on  the  day  preceding  the 
Sabbath,  if  that  day  was  Nisan  15th.  (Ex.  12:  16; 
Lev.  28:  7).  The  same  argument  applies  to  the 
burial  of  Jesus  by  Joseph  of  Arimathea  on  the  day  of 
crucitixion,  and  still  more  strongly  to  Lk.  23:  26;  Mk. 
15:21.  Simon  would  not  have  been  in  the  tields  at 
work,  ITisan  15th.  Opposed  :  Here  all  depends  on  the 
strictness  with  which  the  Jews  observed  the  feast  Sab- 
baths. Maimonides  mentions  bathing  and  anointing,  as 
things  tliat  might  be  done  on  the  feast  days;  and  of 
course  then  everything  necessary  to  prepare  the  dead  for 
burial  would  be  permitted.  Multiplication  of  instances 
tnay  show  tliat  the  law  does  not  apply. 

3.  The  Synopts.  had,  as  the  basis  of  their  narrative 
an  account  which  represented  the  14th  Nisan,  and  not  the 
15th,  as  the  date  of  Christ's  death.  By  a  misunder- 
standing, however,  there  came  to  be  incorporated  with 
this  the'notion  that  Jesus  ate  the  last  supper  with  his 


so  gov.  until  760,  we  must  construe  ■jysfxoveuovTo::  as  appli- 
cable to  any  one  who  rules.  Thus  Cyrenius  may  have 
been  a  joint  or  assistant  ruler,  as  Josephus  speaks  of 
Saturninus  and  Volumnius  as  P.-esidents  of  Sj'ria  ;  or  an 
extraordinary  commissioner  sent  from  Rome  especially 
for  this  purpose.  In  all  this,  is  nothing-  improbable  ;  it 
agrees  with  the  fact  that  about  that  time  he  was  in  East 
and  engaged  in  political  affairs.  Wieseler  :  "this  taxing 
was  before  Cyrenius  was  gov.  of  S."  Zumpt,  in  his  list 
of  Syrian  governors,  B.  C.  30  to  A.  D.  66,  thus  fills  the 
interval  from  748  to  758  : 

748—750  P.  Q.  Varus  or  6—4  B.  C. 

750—753   Qnirimis  or  4 — 1  B.  C. 

753—757  M.  Lollius  or  1  B.  C.  to  3  A.  D. 

757—758  C.  M.  Cousorinus  or  3—4  A.  D. 

758  —  760  L.  V.  Saturninus  or  4—6  A.  D. 

760 — 765       "  '•  is    succeeded    by    Quirinus 

(Cyrenius.) 

If  he  be  right,  Quirinus  was  twice  gov.  of  Syria.  His 
fact  is  that  because  Cilicia,  when  separated  from  Cyprus, 
was  united  to  Syria,  Cyrenius  or  Quirinus,  as  gov.  of  the 
first  mentioned  province,  was  also  really  gov.  of  the  last 
mentioned,  whether  in  any  kind  of  association  with 
Saturninus,  or  otherwise,  can  hardly  be  ascertained,  and 
that  liis  sulisequent  more  special  connection  with  Syria 
led  his  earlier, and  apparently  brief,  connection  to  be  thus 
accurately  noticed.  Varus  was  in  office  at  least  till 
the  summer  of  750.  But  that  he  did  not  continue  as  gov. 
until  759  is  probable  from  the  fact  that  Augustus  ruledl:hat 
no  one  should  govern  a  province  more  than  five  years. 
A  coin  of  Antioch  proves  that  in  758  L.  V.  Saturninus 
was  gov.  of  Syria.  Zumpt's  list  shows  who  filled  this 
office  750—758,  Varus  till  B.  C.  4  or  750.  No  names 
are  given  till  Quirinus  A.  D.  6,  by  Josephus.  During 
interval  he  was  on  military  duty  near  Syria.  The  tri- 
umphal insignia  granted  him  prove  him  legate  and  in 
Syria.  This  taxing  began  a  little  before  he  became 
actual  legate.  As  he  had  been  proconsul  in  Africa,  and 
as  it  was  a  rule  that  the  same  person  should  not  be  ruler 
over  more  than  one  of  the  consular  or  prtetorian  prov- 
inces under  care  of  Senate,  he  could  not  have  been  gov. 


8 

of  any  of  the  provinces  adjacent,  Asia,  Pontus,  Bitli^Miia, 
Galatia  ;  be  must  then  have  been  acting  as  gov.  of  Syria 
and  legate  of  emperor.  If  he  succeeded  Varus,  be  may 
have  completed  taxing  begun  before,  ace.  to  Lk.  Ter- 
tullian  says  the  census  at  the  birth  of  Christ  was  taken 
by  Lentius  Saturninus.  When  then  was  he  gov.  of  Syr- 
ia ?  Most  say  746—748  ;  consequently  the  birth  must  be 
placed  as  early  as  747.  Mommsen  adduces  a  marble 
recording  honors  to  man  who  had  been  twice  legate  in 
Syria.  Only  two  had  been,  L.  Saterninus  and  Quirinus. 
Concerning  importance  of  this  investigation,  we  are  not 
bound  to  establish  any  one  of  these  views  any  more  than 
Luke. 

Star  of  the  Magi.  —  Kepler  lias  shown  that  in  year 
747  a  three-fold  conjunction  of  Jupiter  and  Saturn  in  the 
sign  Pisces  occurred,  and  that  in  spring  of  followingyear 
pTanet  Mars  likewise  appeared  in  this  constellation.  He 
regarded  it  as  probable  that  an  extraordinary  star  was 
(onjoined  with  these  .three  planets,  as  in  1603.  He 
thought  this  conjunction  formed  star  of  Magi.  Ideler 
rejects  the  new  star  of  Kepler,  and  looking  only  to  con- 
junction, puts  birth  747— tliinks  Christ  was  two  yrs.  old 
when  the  command  of  Herod  was  given.  If  this  be  true, 
the  year  would  be  748,  and  agree  with  Kepler's  conjunc- 
tion. Hence  the  star  had  been  seen  by  Magi  two  years 
before  their  arrival  at  Jerusalem.  Wieseler  argues  cor- 
rectly that  we  have  no  certain  ground  for  believing  that 
star  of  Matt,  was  this  conjunction  of  planets.  He  men- 
tions that  the  Chinese  astronomical  tables  record  appear- 
ance of  a  new  star  at  a  time  which  coincides  with  tlie  4th 
year  B.  C.  Precise  conclusions  are  not  to  be  drawn,  but 
confirmation  of  approximate  date  is  secured. 

Day  of  the  Nativity. — Up  to  4th  century,  6th  of  Jan. 
liad  been  observed  as  day  of  Lord's  baptism,  and  had 
been  regarded  as  day  of  his  birth,  from  Lk.  8  :  28,  the 
supposition  being  that  he  was  just  30  wlien  baptized.  In 
4th  century,  under  influence  of  western  church,  this  was 
changed,  and  botli  churches  observed  Dec.  25th.  This 
is  good  date,  because  it  gives  time  enough  for  the  records 
in  Matt,  to  transpire.  During  Dec,  Jan.,  Feb.  and  Mar. 
there  is  no  entire  cessation  of  rain  for  any  long  interval, 


u 

disciples  at  the  hour  les^ally  instituted  for  the  Jewish 
passover ;  and  as  we  have  the  Synopts.,  both  representa- 
tions, though  non-coincident,  yet,  unconsciously  to  the 
evangelists,  ntnv  lie  side  by  side. 

4,  The  feast  (Easter,  pasclial  cont.  of  2d  cent.)  about 
which  the  dispute  was,  \yas  held  in  Asia  14th  Nisan,  at 
the  hour  in  which  the  Jews  celebrated  their  passover 
(i.  e.,  on  the  night  wdiich,  according  to  Jewish  reckoning, 
began  Nisan  15th);  and  hence  Christians  of  Asia  Minor 
who  followed  this  practice  were  called  Quarto-decimani. 
They  were  chietly  Jewish  converts,  and  pleaded  the 
authority  of  John  and  Philip.  The  western  church, 
composed  of  Gentile  converts,  discarded  the  pass.,  and 
celebrated  annually  the  resurrection  on  a  Sunday,  and 
observed  the  previous  Friday  as  a  day  of  penitence  and 
fasting;  pleaded  authority  of  Peter  and  Paul.  The  Tii- 
hingen  school  (Hilgenfeld's  Paschastreit,  pp.  6-118)  make 
inference  vs.  Jolm  and  say  that  that  Gospel  was  not 
ascribed  to  him  by  the  East,  church.  Neander  (Hist.  I., 
513)  thinks  that  Christians  of  Asia  Minor  celebrated 
Nisan  14th  as  day  of  Christ's  death,  but  he  says  that  they 
kept  the  Jewish  passover  and  included  in  it  the  com- 
memoration of  Christ's  death.  Bleek  :  "  John's  know- 
ledge that  Jesus  had  eaten  the  last  supper  with  his  disci- 
ples not  on  the  day  legally  fixed,  but  a  day  earlier,  could 
not  have  obliged  him  to  refuse  to  keep  the  yearly  pass., 
as  he  had  been  wont  to  do  at  Jerus'm,  among  Christians 
at  Ephesus,  who  also  were  wont  to  celebrate  it,  for  Jesus 
himself  had  kept  the  pass,  in  the  earlier  years  of  his 
ministry.  It  is  likely  too  that  the  Christians  of  Asia 
Minor  subsequently  retained  the  custom  simply  because 
it  had  become  a  custom,  and  because  of  the  opposition 
raised  vs.  it."  Hengst.,  Thol.  and  Wieseler  urge  that, 
according  to  John,  Jesus  celebrated  last  supper  with 
disciples,  not  on  the  day  of  the  pass,  (evening  of  Nisan 
14th  or  beginning  of  Nisan  15th),  but  a  day  earlier,  and 
therefore  that  John's  account  does  not  differ  from  that  of 
Synopts.  The  harmonists  find  clear  proof  that  eastern 
and  western  churches  had  all  four  gospels,  proving  they 
knew  all  the  circumstances  and  saw  no  difficulty  in  the 
statements. 


14 

Wieseler  :  Nisan  15th  fell  on  Friday,  788  or  A.  D.  30. 
The  darkness  at  crueitixion  could  not  have  been  caused 
by  an  eclipse,  for  it  was  then  full  moon,  Phlegon,  of 
Tralles,  tries  to  show  that  it  was  caused  by  an  eclipse 
which  took  place  between  July  785  and  786.  But  the 
astronomer  Wurm,  that  the  eclipse  referred  to  took 
place  782. 

Date  of  the  Baptism.— Six  data  are  given  in  Lk.  3  : 
1-2:  "Now  in  the  15th  year  (780)  of  re\i?n  of  Tiberius 
Csesar,  Pontius  Pilate  being  Governor  of  Judea  (779  — 
789),  and  Herod  being  tetrarch  of  Galilee  (750— 792)  and 
his  brother  Philip  being  of  Iturea  and  of  the  region  of 
Trachonitis    (750— 787)^  and    Lysanias   the    tetrarch  of 

Abilene  ( ),  Annas  (759--767)  and  Caiaphas  (778— 

789)  being  the  liigh-priosts."  Luke's  least  carelessness 
or  ignorance  of  the  history  would  lead  to  a  mistake. 
Yet  his  credibility  remains  unimpeachable.  An  anach- 
ronism is  charged.  Josephns  mentions  one  Lysanias 
killed  sixty  years  before.  Therefore,  it  is  said,  that  Lk. 
is  sixty  years  too  late.  Lysanias  was  probably  a  fair.ily 
name.  We  can  see  clearly  why  Luke,  writing  after  Abi- 
lene had  been  made  a  part  of  tlie  Jewish  kingdom,  sliould 
have  mentioned  the  fact,  having  api)arently  so  little  con- 
nection with  gospel  history,  that  at  the  time  when  the 
Baptist  appeared,  this  tetrarchy  was  under  the  rule  of 
Lysanias.  It  was  an  allusion  to  a  foriuer  well-known 
political  division  that  had  now  cease-l  to  exist,  and  was 
to  his  readers  as  distinct  a  mark  of  time  as  his  mention 
of  the  tetrarchy  of  Antipas,  or  Philip.  This  statement 
respecting  Lysanias  shov>^s  the  accuracy  of  Luke's  know- 
ledge of  the  political  history  of  his  times,  and  should 
teach  us  to  rely  upon  it  even  when  unconfirmed  by  con- 
tempoi-aneous  writers.  Annas  had  been  high-priest,  yet 
Cvaiaphas  actually  was  such  when  the  Baptist  appeared. 
The  sovereign  pontificate  had  fallen  to  a  degraded  con- 
dition. The  office  had  become  subject  to  removal.  Dis- 
missal from  it  happened  almost  every  year  (Jos.  Ant., 
15  :  3  :  1  ;  18  :  2  :  2  ;  18  :  5 : 3  ;  20  :  9  :  1,  4).  Caiaphas 
maintained  himself  longer  than  tlie  rest  (25 — 36);  his 
three  predecessors  ordy  about  one  year  each.  As  a  Sad- 
ducee  and  a  priest  he  was  animated  with  double  hatred 
to  the  Saviour.      (Andrews  131 — 138).     Lightfoot  sup- 


15 

poses  that  Annas  was  the  sagan,  or  vicarius  of  the  high- 
priest,  the  next  in  order  to  him,  in  his  absence  to  oversee, 
or  in  his  presence  to  assist  in  tlie  oversight  of  the  affairs 
of  the  temple,  and  the  service  of  the  priests  (C.  W.  II.). 
Wieseler:  The  common  explanation,  adopted  by  Farrar, 
is  that  Annas  was  N^asi  or  President  of  the  Sanhedrim. 

Fifteenth  Year  of  Titberius  Cj5Sar. — Luke  3  :  1,  23- 
Augustus  died  Aug.  767.  The  15th  year  of  Tiberius 
began  Aug.  781.  Christ's  1st  Passover  then  would  be  in 
782.  But^LukeS:  23,  "he  was  about  30  years  of  age 
when  he  began  his  ministry."  Asali'eady  seen,  he  could 
not  have  been  born  later  than  750.  He  must  have  begun 
his  ministry,  tlierefore,  780,  and  been  baptized  in  tliat 
year.  Terlullian,  however,  gives  the  15th  year  of  Tibe- 
rius as  the  year  of  Christ's  passion  :  "  Christ  suftered 
under  Tiberius  Csesar,  R.  Geminus,  and  P.  Geminus,  be- 
ing consuls,  on  the  8th  day  before  the  Calends  of  April," 
(25th  March).  He  was  followed  by  Lactantius,  Augus- 
tine, and  others,  especially  of  the  Latin  Fathers.  San 
Clemente  so  explains  Luke  from  chronological  necessity. 
He  attempts  to  show  that  the  loth  year  of  Tiberius  is 
"  not  to  be  referred  to  the  beginning  of  th€  ministry  of 
John,  nor  to  the  baptism  suffered  hy  Christ  in  Jordan, 
but  to  the  time  of  his  passion  and  crucifixion,  the  evan- 
gelist himself  being  our  leader  and  interpreter."  This 
makes  the  whole  ministry  last  but  few  months;  Christ 
would  be  32  years  old  at  baptism,  and  John's  account  re- 
quires him  to  begin  his  ministry  3  years  before,  and  be- 
fore Luke  makes  Baptist's  ministry  to  begin.  Browii 
thinks  that  the  heading  of  St.  Luke's  3d  chapter  contains 
the  date,  not  of  the  mission  of  John  the  Baptist,  but 
of  the  year  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  especially  in  reference 
to  the  great  events  with  which  it  closed.  Wieseler  refers 
Luke's  words  to  the  imprisonment  of  John,  not  to  the 
baptism  of  Christ;  holds  that  Christ  was  baptized  780, 
John  was  imprisoned  782,  and  Luke  3:  1  is  anticipatory, 
and  chapter  following  goes  back  to  period  prior  to  John's 
imprisonment.  The  exegesis  is  violent.  The  usual  so- 
lution (started  by  Zumpt)  is  that  15th  Tiberius  dates  from 
the  time  he  was  made  associate  emperor  (765)  by  the  Sen- 
ate, 2  years  before  the  death  of  Augustus  (767).  This 
would  bring  780  for  the  year  of  baptism  and  solve  the 


16 

difficulties.  Tliere  are  various  dates  for  computing  the 
reign  Augustus,  according  as  he  increased  in  jiower.  Tlie 
same  is  true  of  Tiberius,  '^Miis  increases  the  difficulty. 
Certain  Egyptian  coins  date  from  tlie  connection  of  Tibe- 
rius with  Augustus.  Tiberius  obtained  full  control  in 
the  Provinces  in  767.  His  15th  year  then,  779,  or  first 
passover  780.  Luke  3  :  23 — (a)  began  to  be  or  (/>)  was 
about  30  wlien  he  began,  i.  e.  his  pu()lic  ministry. 

The  solution  is  coutirrned  by  Jno.  2:  20.     llerod  begaii 
the  temple  in  734  ;  to  this  add  46  (time  of  building)  and 
the  result  is  780,  the  proper  date. 
RESULTS. 


ROBINSON. 

WIESELER. 

ZUMPT. 

Born 

749 

or  750 

.     .     750    .     . 

747 

.    Pilate. 

779-789 

Bap. 

779 

"   780 

.   .   780  .   . 

779A.  D. 

,  20    . 

.    Herod. 

750-792 

1st  Pass. 

780 

.   .   781  .   . 

780     " 

27     . 

.    Philip, 

750-786 

2d      •' 

781  , 

.  .   782  .   . 

781     " 

28    . 

.   Lysaiiias, 

3d       " 

782 

782     " 

29     . 

.   Annas, 

759-7fi7 

Cruc. 

783 

'.   '.   783  '.   '. 

30    . 

.    Caiaplias, 

778-789 

.   .    111).  765  or  767-782 

Duration  of  the  Public  Mimstky. — 3  views  are  held: 
1.  That  it  was  3^  years  ;  2.  2|  years;  3.  1  year  or  less. 
The  Fathers,  from  Is.  61 :  2^  "held  that  it  was  1  year. 
But  the  word  year  is  to  be  understood  as  the  poetical 
parallel  of  day,  or  hour.  The  opinion  of  Fathers  is  also 
based  on  tradition  of  crucifi.xion  15th  Tib.,  782,  com- 
bined with  Luke's  putting  baptism  same  year.  (Lk.  3  :  1). 
Brown  holds  that  the  ministry  was  1  year,  doubts  the 
text  (of  John)  even  though  it  says  the  feasts  were  pass- 
overs.  The  Synopts.  seem  to  give  an  entirely  different 
account  from  John  ;  they  say  Christ  went  to  Galilee  and 
only  after  a  considerable  time  went  to  Jeinisalem  and  tlie 
Temple.  Jolm  says  he  went  to  Jerusalem  and  the  Tem- 
ple immediately,  cleansed  the  latter,  &c.  The  Synopts. 
make  no  feast  till  crucifixion;  inference,  that  ministry 
was  1  year  or  less  in  lengtli.  John  makes  scene  Judea, 
and  mentions  3  or  4  Passovers.  The  Synopts.  were 
aware  of  Judean  ministry:  Mtt.  4:  25;  27:  57.  When 
Saviour  wept  over  Jerusalem,  thej'  mention  it.  There  is 
no  explanation  except  that  lie  had  worked  in  Jerusalem. 
Attempts  to  overthrow  this'  argument  do  not  succeed. 
Baur  :  that  Jesus  wept  over  the  Jews  in  particular.  B. 
had  to  give  this   up.     Strauss:   that  the  words  are  per- 


17 

sonified  wisdom  and  are  quoted  from  lost  writings. 
Sclienkel  :  that  Jiio.'s  mention  of  Passovers  all  refer  to 
one.  Lk.  10:  38,  another  reference  to  Judean  work.  It 
is  impossihle  that  a  pseudo-John  sliould  represent  the 
course  of  the  Life  of  Christ  so  differently  from  the 
Sjnopts.,  when  the  latter  w.ere  duly  accredited.  He  wrote 
with  a  doijmatic  purpose,  and  would  not  expect  to  be  be- 
lieved. On  otlier  hand  John  was  aware  of  the  Galilean 
work.  (7  :  6-9.)  He  implies  that  Galilee  had  been  the  chief 
scene  of  our  Saviour's  visitations.  He  allows  all  the  time 
necessary  for  it  and  on  several  occasions  leaves  it  to  be 
inferred.  Jno.  6  :  2,  multitudes  went  with  Jesus  because 
of  His  miracles,  but  tiie  miracles  are  not  related.  Jno. 
6  :  66,  many  of  his  discijjles  went  back  from  him,  but 
Jno.  had  not  told  us  of  the  formation  of  a  band  of  disci- 
ples. Jno.  6  :  70,  the  12  are  mentioned,  but  there  has 
been  no  account  of  their  calliuij^.  Between  chaptei-s  6 
and  7,  there  is  an  interval  of  7  months.  To  reconcile 
Sj-nopts.  and  Jno.,  all  that  can  be  required  is  to  give  a 
good  reason  for  their  differences.  The  Synopts.'  plan  in- 
cludes active  life  in  Galilee.  Matt,  seeks  proof  in  mii-a- 
cles  for  Christ's  Messiahship.  Luke  gives  biography  of 
Christ  in  his  active  work.  Jno.  came  later,  when  doc- 
trinal points  were  discussed,  particularly  the  person  of 
Christ.  Jno's  [uirpose  is  to  give  His  own  discourses  so 
that  they  may  know  what  He  claimed  concerning  Him- 
self. It  was  not  in  Galilee,  in  parable,  that  these  pro- 
found Christological  statements  were  made.  It  was 
among  the  educated,  cultivated  Pharisees  of  Jerusalem. 
Renan  :  "  I  dare  defy  any  person  to  compose  a  consis- 
tent life  of  Jesus,  if  he  makes  account  of  the  discourses 
which  John  attributes  to.  Jesus." 

John's  feasts  :  1.  "  the  Jews'  passover,"  (781)  (Jno.  2  : 
13) ;  2.  "  a  feast  of  the  Jews,  (782)  (5  :  1) ;"  3.  "  the  Pass, 
nigh,"  (6:  4);  4.  "Before  Pass.,"  (12  :  1);  5.  "feast  of 
Tabernacles,"  (7  :  2)  ;  6.  "  feast  of  dedication,"  (10:  22); 
(Bible  Diet,  for  Pass.,  Pentec,  Tabern.,  Dedic,  and  Pu- 
rim.)  Of  these  feasts  4  were  Passovers,  if  Jno.  5  :  1  be 
so  interpreted.  We  gain  or  lose  a  ^-ear  here.  Pentecost 
occurred  this  year  (782)  on  the  19th  of  May.  No  special 
argument  in  its  favor;  was  not  so  generally  attended  as 
Passover  or  Tabernacles,  and   no   reason   appears  why 


18 

Jesus  should  have  oTYutted  Passover  and  c^one  up  to 
Pente.  Tahernacles  followed,  Sept.  23d.  Chief  argu- 
ment in  its  lavor  :  it  brings  feast  of  5  :  1  into  close  con- 
nection with  that  of  7  :  2,  and  tluis  best  explains  7  :  21-23. 
But  some  months  more  or  less  are  not  under  tlie  circum- 
stances important,  for  tlie  miracle  Avith  its  results  must 
have  been  fresh  in  their  minds  even  after  a  much  longer 
interval.  If  lie  had  not  in  the  interval  between  these 
feasts  been  at  Jerusalem,  as  is  most  i^robable,  His  reap- 
pearance would  naturally  carry  their  minds  back  to  the 
time  when  they  last  saw  him,  and  recall  both  his  work 
and  theii"  own  machinations  vs.  Him.  The  great  objec- 
tion to  identifying  the  ieast  before  us  with  that  of  Taber- 
nacles is  that  it  puts  betv.een  the  end  of  ch.  4,  and  be- 
ginning of  ch.  5,  a  period  of  8  or  9  months,  which  the 
Evangelists  pass  over  in  silence. 

Four  Objections  vs.  i'ASSOVER.  — 1.  Jno,  6:  4,"passover 
nigh."  Christ  did  not  attend.  If  not,  then  he  wns  not 
at  any  feast  till  Tabernacles  (7  :  2),  a  period  of  18  mos. ; 
was  absent  from  Jerusalem  for  that  time.  Argued  :  as  a 
strict  Jew  he  could  not  have  been  so  long  away.  Ans. : 
that  Jesus  should  liave  absented  himself  for  so  long  a 
time  from  the  feasts  is  explained  by  the  hostility  of  the 
Jews,  and  their  purpose  to  slay  Him  (Jno,  5  :  16-18  ; 
7  :  1).  We  know  He  would  not  needlessly  expose  Him- 
self to  peril.  To  the  laws  of  God  respecting  the  feasts 
He  would  render  all  obedience,  but  with  the  liberty  of  a 
son,  not  the  scrupulosity  of  a  Pharisee.  He  was  Lord 
of  Sabbath  ;  so  He  was  of  the  feasts.  He  attended  them 
or  not  as  seemed  best  to  Him.  Chief  argument  in  favor 
of  Purim  is,  that  it  is  brought  into  such  close  connection 
with  the  Passover  (only  7  mos.  absent).  Ellicott  :  "If 
the  note  of  time  derived  from  Jno,  4 :  35  be  correct,  then 
the  festival  here  mentioned  clearly  falls  between  the  end 
of  1  year  and  the  Passover  of  the  one  following  (6:  4) 
and  therefore  can  be  no  other  than  the  feast  of  P'urim." 
That  Jesus  should  have  absented  himself  a  long  time 
from  the  feasts,  is  explained  by  the  hostility  of  the  Jews. 

2.  Jolin  does  not  here  name  the  festival,  whereas  he 
seems  always  to  specify  it  (2  :  13,  23  ;  6  :  4  ;  7  :  2  ;  10  :  23  ; 
11:  55;  12:1). 


19 

3.  That  if  5  :  1  and  G  :  4  are  Passovers,  tliere  is  a  whole 
\-ear  of  wliich  Jiio.  ijives  no  aceonnt.  Ans.  :  tliis  is  in 
accordance  witJi  analogy  of  J  no. 's  gospel.  The  Synopts. 
fill  in  tliis  and  Jno.  confines  himself  to  feasts.  Andrews: 
"this  is  not  the  only  instance  in  which  Jno.  narrates 
events  widely  separated  in  time,  withont  noting  the  in- 
terval. Thns,  ch.  6  relates  what  took  place  before  a 
Passover,  and  ch.  7  what  took  place  at  feast  of  Taber- 
nacles, 6  months  after.  In  10:  22  is  a  siuhlen  transition 
from  Tabernacles  to  Dedication." 

4.  Accounts  for  Synopts.  not  nientioning  feasts.  His 
work  in  Galilee  has  reference  to  national  salvacion  thro' 
tlie  faith  of  tho9<i  who  should  believe  on  him  there. 
This  may  explain  their  silence  in  respect  to  the  feasts 
wliich  Jesus  attended  while  in  Galilee.  Any  transient 
work  at  Jerusalem,  addi-essins^  itself  esi)ecially  to  the 
hierarchy,  had  no  important  beai'ing  upon  tjie  gre;it 
result. 

For  Passover. — 1.  Common  text  wrongly  omits  arti- 
cle, which  would  naturally  refer  to  chief  feast.  Modern 
critics  and  best  MSS.,  including  Sinaitic,  agree  as  to  this. 
(Winer,  p.  119  or  126).  Lange  :  "  The  article  is  not  ab- 
solutely conclusive,  for  in  Heb.  a  noun  before  the  gen. 
is  made  definite  by  prefixing  article,  not  to  noun  itself, 
but  to  the  gen.,  and  the  same  is  the  case  in  the  Sept." 
Ellicott  :  "  The  true  reading  appears  certainly  to  l)e  kofivr^. 
It  has  in  addition  to  secondary  authorities,  the  support 
of  three  out  of  the  four  leading  uncial  MSS.,  and  is 
adapted  by  Lachm.,  Tisch.,  and  others."  Tholuck: 
"  Were  the  article  genuine,  we  would  be  compelled  to 
regard  the  Passover  as  meant.  If  it  is  not  genuine,  the 
Passover  may  be  meant,,  but  so  also  may  some  other 
feast."     (Andrews,  172). 

2.  Phrase"feastof  the  Jews"is  not  applicable  to  Purim. 
P.  was  •'  not  a  Mosaic  feast,  nor  of  divine  appointment, 
but  estaljlished  l)y  the  Jews  wliile  in  captivity,  in  com- 
memoration oftlieir  deliverance  from  the  murderous  plans 
of  llamau.  (Ksther,  3  and  9).  It  was  national  and  i)o- 
litical,  rather  than  religious.  Why  then  should  Jews  go 
up  ii vim  Jerusalem  to  this  feast?  Ellicott:  "  The  view 
of  the  best  recent  harmonists  aitd  commentators  is  that 
feast  was  the  feast  of  Purim."     Lange:  "Fanaticism  in 


20 

the  people  luitiirally  sou2:ht  to  make  it  a  festival  of  tri- 
umph over  the  Gentiles  (suhseqnently  over  the  Christians 
also.)  On  this  account,  the  particular  feast  was  preemi- 
nentl}'  the  feast  of  the  Jews  (with  the  art.)  and  the  art.  in 
C.  Sinaiticus  cannot  be  made  to  speak  exclusively  for 
pass." 

3.  Jesus  went  and  found  a  crowd.  P.  was  observed  all 
over  the  land  :  had  no  reference  to  Jerus.  No  special 
services  were  appointed  for  its  observance  at  the  temple, 
nor  does  it  appear  that  it  was  their  custom.  Each  Jew 
onserved  it  wherever  he  chanced  to  be.  Lange  :  "  Christ 
may  have  attended  tliis  f.  as  he  attended  other  festivals, 
(7  :  2  ;  10  :  22)  without  legal  obligation.,  merely  for  pur- 
pose of  doino;  good." 

4.  No  adequate  motive  is  assigned  for  Christ's  going  to 
Jerusalem:  lie  was  not  required  to  do  so  l)y  the  law.  El- 
licott  :  "  In  the  year  under  consideration,  Passover  would 
occui"-  only  a  month  afterward,  and  our  Lord  might  well 
have  thought  it  was  advisable  to  iix  his  abode  at  Jerusa- 
lem ;ind  to  conmience  his  preaching  before  the  liurried 
influx  of  tlie  multitudes  that  came  up  to  the  great  yearly 
festival." 

5.  Healing  of  inflrm  man  was  on  a  Sabbath.  The  fes- 
tival of  Purim  h.sted  2  days,  and  was  regularly  observed 
on  14th  and  15th  Adar  (March);  but  if  14th  happened  to 
fall  on  Sabbath,  or  on  2d  or  4th  day  of  the  week,  the 
commencement  of  the  fest.  was  deferred  until  the  next 
day.  Purim  was  never  celebrated  as  a  Sabb.  Lange  : 
"The  Sabb.  spoken  of  5  :  9  may  have  preceded  or  suc- 
ceeded the  feast." 

6.  Lk.  13  :  6-7.  "  These  3  years."  Ilengst.  says  the 
reference  is  to  Jewish  people,  among  whom  Christ  had 
wrought  for  3  years.  But  we  cannot  draw  argument  from 
parable;  not  conclusive  enough.  Andrews  :  "  It  is  doubt- 
ful whether  the  expression  has  any  chronological  value." 
Lange  :  "  If  one  insists  on  having  a  def  time  for  God's 
work  of  grace  on  Isr.,  we  may  reckon  the  time  from  the 
public  appearance  of  Jno.  B.,  one-half  year  befoi-e  the 
entrance  of  Jesus  upon  his  offlce,  up  to  the  present  mo- 
ment, which  altogether  does  not  make  \\\)  much  less  than 
three  years." 


21 

7.  Time  needed  for  events.  Otherwise  we  must  com- 
press into  one  month,  what  according  to  the  other  sclierae 
took  a  wholf^  year.  It  can  hardly  he  conceived  that  he 
should  have  done  so  mucli  in  such  narrow  limits.  The 
harmony  will  make  Christ's  ministry  3|  years  (Rob.)  or  2^ 
( Wiese.  and  Zumpt). 

PREPARATORY  PERIOD. 

§1.  Limits:  froni  beginning  of  gospel  narrative  until 
entrance  upon  public  ministry'.  Subdivision  :  {a)  all  pre- 
ceding nativity;  {b}  all  succeeding  it  until  entrance  upon 
public  ministry.  Mtt.  and  Lk.  are  authorities  for  nativity, 
and  are  supplementary  to  one  another,  in  no  case  paral- 
lel. Matt,  gives  histor.  proof  that  Jesus  was  the  Messh.  of 
O.  T.  Therefore  he  records  his  birth,  genealogy,  and 
other  events  connected  therewith.  Lk.  gives  events  in 
order,  and  therefore  goes  back  to  annunciation  and  to  his. 
predecessor.  Mk.  portrays  active  life  of  Christ.  John's 
design  is  to  represent  him  as  a  historic  person  in  his  own 
words.  The  history  difters  from  every  other  h.  The 
facts  have  no  parallel  ;  natundly  it  should  have  none. 
The  miraculous  element  predominates  here  as  nowhere 
else.  This  is  history  written  for  a  purpose!^  Charged  : 
that  it  was  written  afterward.  Bu*  we  have,  intermingled, 
the  divine,  aiigelic,  and  human.  When  the  Son  of  God 
was  to  come,  there  must  be  peculiar  circumstances.  Un- 
believers stumble  here,  and  believers  lind  proof  for  gen- 
uineness. Some  believers,  however,  find  their  strongest 
difficulty  here. 

Classification  of  characteristics :  [a)  Events  were 
to  be  so  adapted  as  to  form  basis  of  our  faith. 
If  it  be  true  that  Son  of  God  became  S.  of  man, 
it  is  more  than  probab'le  it  was  done  in  this  way.  We 
must  have  practical  evidence  of  birth  at  the  time  of  its 
occurrence.  It  would  not  do  to  attest  it  afterward,  else 
it  would  be  charged  that  it  was  an  invention,  or  dream  of 
an  enthusiast.  Ebionites  and  Socinians  say  he  became 
Son  of  God  first  at  baptism.  Miraculous  element,  there- 
fore, is  inseparable  from  the  hist.  It  grows  out  of  it 
from  the  very  nature  of  the  case.  Incarnation  itself  the 
greatest  miracle.  (6)  Publicity  must  be  secured  ;  atten- 
tion attracted.     Chain  of  evidence  was  so  good,  as  here 


22 

written,  that  it  was  never  doubted  by  enemies  fprimi- 
tively).  (e)  The  child  must  be  secured,  so  as  not  to  ap- 
pear a  rival  of  civil  ruloi's,  and  to  prevent  premature 
action  by  them.  Yet  witnesses  must  be  numerous  enough 
to  identify  Clirist  from  birth;  to  show  that  babeofBeth- 
leliem  and  Jesus  of  I^az.  were  one  and  same  person. 
((/)  Wliile  humility  of  Son  of  God  was  to  be  shown,  yet_ 
from  iirst  moment,  he  must  be  attended  with  all  dignity 
and  lionor  due  to  divin.ity.  He  must  bring  heaven  with 
him,  angelic  choir,  homage  of  good  men  (Sheph'ds  and 
Magi).  As,  at  cross,  so  at  manger,  humility  is  relieved 
by  heavenly  dignities,  [e)  Ant^-typical  ;  as  life  and  death 
of  Christ  are  the  final  facts  of  O,  T.,  it  must  be  shown 
he  cjime  to  fulfill  it.  Unity  of  divine  plan  must  be  vin- 
dicated ;  liis  relation  to  the  law  be  made  clear.  These 
things  belong  to  this  period  as  preparatoi-y.  If  men  had 
been  left  in  doubt,  they  would  have  rejected  Christ  at 
beginning  of  his  ministry.  Hence  we  read  re[ieatedly, 
"all  this,  that  the  Scriptures"  &c.  ;  we  see  express  re- 
cognition of  faithful  few,  in  wlioni  spirit  of  old  economy 
was  manifested.  Gospel  hist,  is  last  ch.  of  old  dispens'n. 
N".  T.  begins  with  Pentecost,  where  0.  T.  scenery,  poe- 
try, etc.,  find  their  fultillnient.  (/)  Typical;  his  life  is 
type  of  every  Chn.  and  of  Church  as  whole.  Old 
economy  is  typical  bee.  it  points  to  the  future,  as  it  em- 
bodies v^■hat  has  been  already  realized.  That  very  life 
in  which  the  old  is  fullilled  is  still  a  type  of  Chn.  spirit- 
ual life.  Impossible  to  interpret  Gospels  and  Acts,  without 
violating  meaning,  unless  we  believe  facts  are  arranged 
purposely  to  embody  the  doct.,  the  spiritual  truth.  Such 
were  miracles,  the  fact  that  he  carried  his  dealings  be- 
yond borders  of  Palestine  (gospel  for  world).  Why  did 
he  attend  temple?  why  submit  to  circum.  ?  to  teach  the 
evil  of  sin. 

§2.  OtHcial  character  of  John  Baptist  was  necessary  at 
outset.  Ritualists  claim  Clirist  was  disciple  of  John,  tiiat 
his  work  grew  out  of  John's.  Annunc'n  of  Bapt's  birth 
prepared  people  and  Ids  parents  to  understand  his  nds- 
aion,  and  liow  to  treat  him.  Honor  is  done  to  O.  T.  in 
choosing  priest  of  temple  (1  Chron.,  24),  prophecy  is 
fulfilled^  type  is  given,  in  declaration  that  John  was  to  be 
a.    Nazarite    from    the    womb   (as  Samuel  and  Samson). 


23 

Spiritual  meaning  of  incense  is  seen  (prayer)  ;  Lk.  1  :  10. 
Emphasis  is  laid  on  character  of  parents  (Lk.  1  :  6),  they 
were  observers  of  rites  and  exercised  a  lively  faith.  Cer- 
emonial righteousness  was  their  possession.  Mass  of  the 
Jews  corrupt.  But  some  were  willing  to  introduce  new 
economy.  Meaning  of  both  names  was  explained  and 
fulfilled  by  what  happened  to  those  who  bore  them  : 
Zach.  (the  Lord  remeujbers),  Eliz.  (God's  oath).  Hope 
of  giving  birth  to  tlie  deliverer  was  common  among  Jew- 
ish women.  400. yrs.  angelic  visitation  had  been  discon- 
tinued, now  it  is  renewed.  John  asNazarite  (Numb.  6  : 
1-21)  was  to  be  a  reformer.  Mai.  4  :  6,  the  Jewish  con- 
ception of  this  p'cy  was  -that  E.  was  to  be  the  forerunner 
and  hence  had  not  died.  This  impression  was  to  be  cor- 
rected. Z's  fiiith  not  strong  enough  at  first ;  asks  a  sign, 
and  is  given  one  (dumbness,  a  punishment  for  his  unbe- 
lief). "As  faith  is  to  be  the  chief  condition  of  the  new 
covenant,  it  wns  needful  that  the  first  manifestation  of 
unbelief  should  be  emphatically  punished  ;  but  the  wound 
inflicted  becomes  a  healing  medicine  for  the  soul." 
(Lange^ 

Objections  answered  :  1.  Z's  treatment  was  not 
only  punitive  but  was  to  confirm  his  faith,  and  to  be 
a  lesson  to  the  people.  2.  Strauss  objects,  that  a  name  is 
given  to  an  individual  angel,  wh.  we  do  not  find  in  O.  T. 
until  after  the  captivity  in  Danl.  Obj'n  is  therefore  that 
Jews  had  no  doct.  of  angels  before  captivity,  that  they 
borrowed  their  ideas  from  Persians.  If  so,  how  came 
they  to  have  Hebrew  names  ?  Furthermore  (a)  the  O.  T. 
is  full  of  the  doct. ;  and  (b)  we  have  no  proof  that  Jews 
borrowed  from  Persians  ;  (c)  Tho'  names  are  given  to  none 
until  Dan.'s  time,  yet  it,  is  characteristic  of  O.  T.  to  be 
progressive.  Xames  of  angels  might  be  expected  in  an 
Apocalyptic  book  like  Dan.  ((/)  Doct.  of  angels  was  re- 
ceived and  confirmed  by  Christ  and  Apostles.  3.  Doubt- 
ed, whether  such  definite  names  are  borne  in  heaven. 
Gab'l  represents  ministries  of  angels  toward  man  ;  Mich, 
is  type  and  leader  of  their  strife,  in  God's  name  and  His 
strength  vs.  the  power  of  Satan.  In  O.  T;,  therefore,  he 
is  guardian  of  Jewish  people  in  their  antagonism  to  god- 
less poW'Cr  and  heathenism.  Many  Reformers  embraced 
idea  that  Mich,  is  Christ.     If  true,'some  would  represent 


24 

name  of  Gab'l  (man  of  God)  in  same  way.  Interpretation 
is  inadmissible.  Whenever  angel  Jeliovah  appears,  it  is 
always  as  God.       We  are  never  left  in  donbt. 

Mjith.  theory  holds  that  this  was  a  myth'l  age,  that  dis- 
ciples believed  Christ  was  raised  from  dead,  owing  to  the 
entlmsiastic  statements  of  the  women.  Myth  is  a  story  or 
narrative, involving  moral  or  relig.  trnth,  in  wh.  narrative 
form  and  idea  involved  are  blended.  There  is  no  conscious 
invention  to  give  birth  to  a  popular  idea.  This  theory 
saves  moral  character  of  early  disciples;  holds  that  John 
became  imp.  after  he  began  his  public  ministry,  and  these 
stories  grew  up  in  connection  witli  both.  Only  question 
is,  how  much  is  mythical  and  how  much  historical  ?  Prac- 
tical application  of  the  theory  necessitates  in  many  cases 
the  charge  of  conscious  deceit.  NaUiraUstic  cxp.  maintains 
that  Christ  worked  great  cures,  but  by  nat.  causes.  He 
seemed  to  raise  from  dead,  but  the  man  was  not  dead. 
So  here,  Z.  was  paralyzed  owing  to  excitement.  Tendency 
hiipoth.  holds  that  there  was  a  conscious  falsiiication  of 
histor}'  in  accommodation  to  certain  cui'rent  ideas;  hist, 
is  rewritten  to  give  currency  to  certain  doctrines.  Strauss 
(2d  Life)  came  over  to  this  theory  ;  sliifted  his  ground. 
Legmdary  theory  (Renan)  holds  there  is  u  basis  of  fact, 
but  altered  by  blending  of  natural  enthusiasm  and  pious 
fraud;  very  much  like  legends  of  saints  in  Rom.  church. 
Renan  adopts  more  of  Gospels  than  others,  because  his 
romancing  is  not  bound  by  so  doing;  his  method  is  not 
so  destructive  as  Strauss's, 

§3.  Six  mos.  aiter  conception  of  Elizabeth,  an  angel 
(Gab.)  appears  to  Mary  and  announces  that  she  was  to 
give  birth  to  Messiah.  Points  of  analogy  and  contrast 
with  annunc'n  and  birth  of  John  (Alexander)  : 

1.  Analogy  : 

{a)  Both  were  announced  by  angel  of  God. 
(6)  "  to  be  extraordinary. 

{(t)  "  named  by  the  angel, 

(f/)  "  connected  with  prophecy. 

W)  Offices  of  both  were  described. 

(/)  In  both,  a  sign  was  given  to  strengthen  faith  of  the 
parents. 

2.  Contrast: 

(a)  John's  was  communicated  to  priest  in  the  temple; 
Christ's  to  humble  virgin  in  small  town  of  Galilee. 


25 

{b)  Jolin's  aiinounceineut  was  more  honorable  than 
Christ's  birth. 

(c)  Our  Lord  surrounded  his  messenger  with  pomp 
which  he  denied  to  himself. 

The  announcement  must  be  made  previously  to  his 
birth,  that  the  woman  mav  know  what  was  happenino-  to 
her.  Is.  7  :  14  fulUlIed  in'Mt.  1  :  23.  A  virgin  betrothed 
should  be  chosen,  partly  that  she  might  be  protected  by 
a  good  man  in  circumstances  into  which  she  was  brought, 
partly  that  the  heirship  to  the  throne  might  be  conform- 
ed to.  Two  points  :  1.  Whether  both  (J.  and  M.)  were  of 
liouse  of  David.  2.  Whether  Lk.  1  :  27  is  to  be  confined 
TO  Jos.  Angel  tells  M.  that  the  child  must  be  of  h.  of  D. 
What  meaning  would  tiiis  have  to  her  before  her  concep- 
tion, unless  she  knew  that  she  was  of  h.  of  D.  ?  Lange 
"  The  words  relate  solely  to  J.  They  by  no  means  deny 
descent  of  M.  from  D."  Annnnc'n  was  private  to  avoid 
notice  of  civil  authorities  and  the  jealousj'  of  Herod.  Lk. 
1  :  32,  Dan.  7  :  14,  his  kingship  over  Israel  is  promised. 
For  M.,  intimate  with  O.  T.,  this  p'cy  wd.  contain  essence 
of  most  remarkable  promises  (2  Sam.  7,  Ps.  45,  Is.  9, 
Mic.  5).  Lk.  1  :  42,  44,  the  extraordinary  conception  of 
her  kinswoman  was  a  sign  of  more  ext.  c.  of  her  own. 

Objections  :  1.  That  doct.  of  immac.  conception  is 
inadequate  to  account  for  sinlessness  of  Jesus.  But  Ije 
who  was  light  and  life  of  men  must  surely  see  lio^ht  of 
day,  not  by  carnal  procreation,  but  by  immediate  exer- 
cise of  divine  power.  How  could  he  be  free  from  every 
taint  of  original  sin,  and  redeem  us  from  power  of  sin,  if 
he  had  been  born  by  fleshly  intercourse  of  sinful  parents  ? 
The  strong  and  healthy  graft  which  was  to  bring  new  life 
into  the  diseased  stock,  must  not  originate  from  this  stock, 
but  be  grafted  into  it  from  without.  Miraculous  concep. 
is  a  (Txai^oa/Mu  to  those  alone  who  will  see  in  our  Lord 
nothing  but  pure  humanity,  and  who  put  his  sinlessness 
in  place  of  the  real  incarnation  of  God  in  him.  Ration- 
alistic explanation  :  that  he  was  of  ordinary  birth,  and 
that  this  view  existed  among  the  Jews,  and  contined  un- 
til the  5th  cent.  By  that  time,  gospels  were  embellished 
to  give  expression  to  current  views,  and  the  conclusion 
is  the  immaculate  concep.  Ansvv'd  :  (a)  The  relation  in 
wh.  Clirist  stands  to  his  mother  is   emphasized,  as  com- 


26 

pared  witli  Jos.  The  latter  is  never  mentioned  except  as 
protector  of  Christ's  infancy.  From  the  monient  of  the 
conception,  the  Holy  Spirit  continued  to  intinence  and 
penetrate  mind  and  spirit  of  AI.,  to  suppress  power  of  sin 
and  make  her  body  his  consecrated  temple,  {b)  Titles, 
"  born  of  a  woman,"  "  made  flesh,"  "  son  of  man,"  the 
constant  reference  to  mode  of  his  oriij^in,  as  well  as  the 
nature  of  his  constitution  show  his  rehition  to  the  wo- 
man was  more  important  than  to  the  man.  (c)  The  doc- 
trine is  based  on  pronhecy.  2.  That  in  gospels  he  is  son 
of  Jos.  (John  1  :  45  ;  Lk.  4  :  22  and  2  :  48).  Mary,  in  pub- 
licly speaking  to  her  son  of  Jos.,  must  say  "•  thy  fa- 
ther," Pressense  :  "  This  assertion  son  of  Jos.  is  always 
put  into  mouth  of  Jews  as  sign  of  unbelief  or  contempt. 
It  is  even  so  in  the  case  of  Nathaniel."  3.  That  the 
doctrine  is  not  found  elsewhere  in  N.  T.  Then  we  have 
no  Savioui-. 

Naturalists  and  others  indulge  in  different  forms  of 
blasphemous  interpretation.  They  deprive  Jos.'s  bride 
of  chastity  and  purity,  her  richest  dowry.  The  notion 
was  first  conceived  iii  brain  of  heathen  (Oelsus)  who  de- 
rides mother  of  Jesus  as  victim  of  seduction.  Jewish 
version  of  this  fable  {rationalismu.s  L'ulf/ari.s)  names  one 
Panthera  or  Pandira  as  her  seducer.  Mijth.  theory :  that 
this  conce|)tion  in  cont.  to  hist,  probability,  that  Jews 
did  not  sympathize  with  expression  "sons  of  God,"  bee. 
polytheistic.  It  was  a  story  invented  to  support  church 
claims,  referring  to  the  religious  feeling  of  ancients,  who 
revered  their  great  men  so  much  as  to  make  them  sons 
of  God  (numerous  in  mythology.)  So  also,  it  is  said, 
tlie  Evangelists  did  with  Christ. 

§4.  Visit  of  Mary  to  Eliz.  Ebrard  and  others:  that 
Jos.  had  taken  his  betrothed  wife  to  his  home,  after  a 
public  solemnization  of  their  nuptials,  before  this  jour- 
ney. Alford  :  "  that  as  a  betrothed  virgin  she  could  not 
travel  alone."  But  that  no  unmarried  female  could 
journey  to  visit  her  friends  is  incredible.  M.  may  have 
journeyed  with  friends,  or  under  spec'l  protection  of  a  ser- 
vant, or  with  neighbors  going  to  Pass.  Lange  :  '•  She  told 
Jos.  of  visit  of  angel."  But  Jo's  knowledge  of  her  con- 
dition was  subsequent  to  her  return.  M.  leaves  it  to  God 
to  enlighten  him  as  He  had  her.     3-fold  design  of  visit  : 


27 

1.  To  give  occasion  for  exercise  of  the  spirit  of  inspi- 
ration, to  confirm  claims  of  the  2  children, 

2.  To  connect  these  extraordinary  events  in  minds  of 
people,  before  these  persons  were  born.  The  children 
wei-e  brought  together  in  the  bosoms  of  tlieir  mothers. 

3.  To  make  known  their  relative  dignity  ;  Jesns  over 
Jol  n. 

Mary's  hymn  is  modeled  on  Hannali's.  (1st  Sam.  2). 
It  may  be  divided  into  3  or  4  strophes,  forming  an  ani- 
mated doxology.  The  grace  of  God  (Lk.  1  :  48),  his  om- 
nipotence (49-51),  his  holiness  (49,  51,  54,)  liis  justice 
(52 — 3),  and  especially  liis  taithfulness  (54-5),  are  cele- 
brated. It  sounds  like  an  echo  of  Miriam's  and  Debor- 
ali's  harps  ;  has  characteristics  of  Ileb.  poetr^^  intone 
and  language,  and  can  be  rendered  almost  word  for  word. 
Historically,  it  is  important  as  showing  the  Messianic 
hope,  and  the  form  of  Messianic  expectation.  Lk.'s  pre- 
face is  classical  Greek;  yet  this  liymn  is  in  best  Hebrew. 
This  fact  confirms  hist,  proof  of  text.  Obj'us  :  Rational- 
alists  reject  the  supernatural  and  account  for  it  on  nat. 
grounds.  Meyer  rejects  it  on  purely  subjective  grounds 
(M.  could  not  go  alone  and  Eliz.  would  not  receive  her). 
Strauss  consistently  rejects  all,  even  the  relationship  bet. 
Jesus  and  John.  Home  of  Zach.:  "Tlie  supposition  is 
tiiat '/o!J^a  (Lk.  1:39)  has  been  substituted  for  ' louza, 
and  it  is  credible."  (Lange. j  Most  common  idea:  that 
Hebron  was  the  place,  bee.  in  "the  hill  country."'  It  was 
17  miles  S.  of  Jerusalem.      (20  Rom.  miles.) 

§5.  Birth  of  John.  Efl:ect  was  shown  by  the  concourse 
at  his  circumcision.  It  was  customary  to  name  child  on 
same  day,  as  circumcision  (Gen.  21:3,  4).  Eliz.  insisted 
on  his  being  called  John.  Some  say  that  Zach.  had  not 
told  Eliz.  of  the  name  given  in  teniple.  Therefore  this 
was  new  revelation.  Most  likely  he  had  told  her.  From 
making  signs  to  Zach.,  some  have  inferred  that  he  was 
deaf  as  well  as  dumb.  Otliers  :  it  was  to  spare  the  feel- 
ings of  mother.  Zach.  wrote  on  tablet  that  his  name  was 
John  (already  given  and  not  open  to  change).  The  first 
N".  T.  writing  opens  with  grace.  Prophetic  cycles  accom- 
panied great  hist,  epochs;  there  is  an  equal  advance  of 
proph.  with  hist.  It  comes  at  revolutionary  periods  : 
Moses,  Joshua  and  Judges,  the  completed  kingdom  un- 


28 

der  David  and  Solomon;  Isaiah,  Hosea,  &c.,  during  As- 
syrian period;  Jere.,  Ilab'k,  Zeph.,  during  period  of  exile. 

Zaeliariah's  song  was  to  Jewish  witnesses  a  renewal  of 
inspiration,  the  highest  eircnmstanee  of  the  occurrence. 
For  400  years  it  had  ceased.  By  its  renewal,  they  regard- 
ed a  new  national  change  iis  intended.  Like  Mary's,  it 
refers  to  fultilltnent  of  O.  T.  [)rophecies,  but  is  not  based 
on  any  O.  T.  song,  and  is  more  national  than  individual. 
In  Mai-y's  there  is  a  relative  want  of  originality,  and  it  is 
full  of  reminiscences.  Lange  :  "The  royal  spirit  is  more 
expressed  in  her  song;  the  priestly  character  in  Zach.'s 
In  his  the  O.  T.  type,  in  hers  the  I*^ew  prevails."  Mary's 
expectations  of  the  Messiah  (Lk.  1  :  5)  were  not  of  a 
particular  and  exclusive,  but  of  an  universal  jiat.  Zach's 
song  (Lk.  1 :  76,  78)  is  a  striking  proof  of  the  prevalence 
of  theocratic  over  paternal  feeling,  as  the  Mssh.  is  al- 
wa^'s  placed  in  a  more  prominent  position  than  his  fore- 
runner. Dayspring,  Mai.  4  :  2.  Both  songs  breathe 
theocratic  spirit  of  0.  T. ;  show  the  expectation  of  Him 
who  was  to  have  spiritual  rule.  John  dwelt  by  himself 
in  wild  and  thinly  peopled  region  S.  W.  of  Dead  Sea 
near  his  home,  perhaps  to  show  by  his  seclusion  that  he 
was  nninstructed  in  ordinary  way  but  by  Holy  Ghost. 
Kenan  :  •'  the  masses  had  become  accustomed  to  look 
upon  'the  man  of  God '  as  a  hermit.  They  imagined 
that  all  the  holy  personages  had  their  days  of  penitence, 
of  severe  life,  and  of  austerities.  It  was  readily  con- 
ceived that  the  leaders  of  sects  must  be  recluses,  having 
their  peculiar  rules  and  their  institutes,  like  the  found- 
ers of  rel.  orders."  Strauss  and  Meyer  see  in  his  seclu- 
sion, influence  of  theEssenes(myst.  ascetics  and  devotees). 
But  there  is  no  analogy.  N.  T.  does  not  mention  th'em, 
Jose})hus  does  largely. 

§6.  Annunciation  to  Joseph  nee,  bee.  a  direct  wit- 
ness was  needed  to  the  person  most  interested,  to  show 
that  her  acct.  was  not  a  mistake  nor  a  matter  of  mere 
enthusiasm.  Her  explanations  were  not  believed  and  her 
faith  was  tested.  Jos.  determ'd  to  divorce  her  (privately). 
Milman  :  '•  Bill  of  divorce  was  nee.  even  when  the  par- 
ties were  only  betrothed,  and  where  the  mari-iage  had 
not  actually  been  solemnized.  It  is  probable  tliat  the 
Mosaic  law  wh.  in  such  cases  adjudged  a  female  to  death 


29  « 

(Dt.  20  :  23-5)  was  not  at  this  time  executed  in  its  origi- 
nal vigor."  Joseph  was  dr/aio^  (Mtt.  1  :  19),  not  kind, 
but  legally  just,  merciful.  A  public  divorce  would  be 
in  writing  from  the  |)riest,  with  the  causes  of  it  stated, 
else  the  woman  could  not  marry  again.  Annunciation 
was  at  Naz.  God  appears  4  times  to  him  in  a  dream  (Mtt. 
1:  20;  2:  13;  2:  19;  2:  22).  Prophecy  of  Mtt.  1:  22 
is  uttered  by  the  angel,  from  Is.  7  :  14.  Strauss  :  it  is 
not  at  all  applicable  to  Christ  ;  the  Evgst.  l)y  mistake 
thought  it  was.  Alexander:  "  tlie  application  of  it 
to  Christ  is  not  a  mei-e  accommodation,  meaning  that  the 
words  originally  used  in  one  sense,  and  in  reference  to 
one  object,  might  now  be  repeated  in  anc^ther  sense,  and 
of  another  subject ;  for  this  does  not  satisfy  the  strong 
sense  of  the  passage  (that  it  might  be  fulfilled),  nor  would 
such  a  fanciful  coincidence  have  been  alleged  witli  so 
much  emphasis  by  Mtt.,  still  less  by  the  angel.  The 
only  sense  that  can  be  reasonably  put  upon  the  words  is, 
that  the  miraculous  conception  of  Mssh.  was  predicted 
by  Is.  in  the  words  here  quoted.  This  essential  meaning- 
is  not  affected  by  the  question  whether  the  prediction 
was  lirst  fullilled  in  the  nat.  birth  of  a  child  soon  after  it 
was  uttered,  and  tlie  subsequent  deliverance  of  Judah 
from  invasion,  but  again  fultilled  in  a  higher  sense,  in 
the  nativity  of  Christ ;  or  whether  it  related  only  to  the  , 
latter,  and  presented  it  to  Ahaz  as  a  pledge  that  the 
chosen  people  could  not  be  destroyed  until  Mssh.  came." 
Best  resort  is  (Hengst.)  that  the  prophecy  applies  to 
Christ,  and  is  presented  to  Ahaz  as  tlie  sign  of  deliver- 
ance. 

Matt,  gives  an  nunc,  to  Jos.  only  ;  Lk.  to  Mary  only. 
Objected:  1.  That  these  ai;cts.  exclude  each  other.  2. 
That  the  cliild's  name  was  given  to  Jos.,  after  it  had  been 
given  to  Mary  ;  therefore  not  nee.  second  time.  The 
two  accounts  harmonize  and  confirm  each  other.  Each 
supposes  the  same  basis  of  fact,  {a)  Silence  in  one  hist, 
does  not  contradict  a  statement  in  another.  (6)  Selection 
of  incidents  is  ace.  to  their  respective  plans.  Matt,  giv- 
ing Jos's  genealogy,  must  show  how  Jos.  took  Mary  as 
his  wife.  He  is  theocratic.  Jesus  is  presented  as  ful- 
fillment  of  the  theocracy.  Lk.  supplements  Matt,  and 
gives  what  belongs  to  Christ's  human  relations;  depicts 


»  30 

the  Son  of  Man  appearing  in  Israel,  but  for  benefit  of 
whole  race  of  num. 

§7.  Birtli  of  Jesus  was  at  Beth.  In  consequence  of  an 
edict  that  all  the  world  should  be  taxed,  Jos.  and  Mary 
leave  Naz.  to  go  to  Beth,  the  city  of  Dav.  to  be  ta.xed 
there.  Pressense  :  "The  Jewish  law  laid  no  obligation  on 
a  woman  to  undertake  such  a  journey,  for  the  writing  of 
her  name  was  enougli.  But  who  can  wonder  at  the  young 
wife,  situated  like  Mary,  accompanying  her  protector  ? 
Besides,  slie  was  not  ignorant  of  the  propliecy  which 
pointed  out  Beth,  as  the  city  of  Messiah."  Lk.  dates  from 
decree  of  Augustus,  bee.  it  was  the  occasion  that  brought 
Jos.  and  Mary  to  Bethlehem.  It  suggests  1.  That  the 
Saviour  was  born  during  the  reign  of  Augustus  (the 
golden  age  of  Roman  history).  2.  That  the  theocracy 
had  sunk  to  its  lowest  possible  level.  3.  That  the  pa- 
rents enrolled  their  names  in  the  registration  of  the  whole 
world. 

Jewish  law  required  the  enrolment  of  women  and 
hence  this  law  took  them  to  Beth.  (See  preceding  quot. 
from  Pressense).  Farrar :  "  Women  wei'e  liable  to  a 
capitation  tax,  if  this  enrolment  {dTioyocuf/j)  also  involved 
taxation  (drroTlfir^ae::)."  The  Roman  law  cared  not  where; 
it  required,  however,  enrolment  of  whole  world,  and 
hence  Mary  is  included.  Lange  :  "  The  enrolment  would 
naturally  take  place  in  Judea,  in  consideration  of  the 
claims  of  nationality.  The  policy  of  Rome,  as  well  as 
the  relig.  scruples  of  the  Jews,  demanded  it.  For  this 
reason,  every  one  went  to  his  ancestral  city  to  be  regis- 
tered, tiiough  in  other  cases  the  Roman  census  might  be 
taken,  either  ace.  to  place  of  residence  ov  forum  originis." 
Place  of  birth  a  manger  ;  evidently  so  ordered  to  signify 
the  voluntary  self-denial  of  Jesus.  Calvin  :  "  descend- 
ants of  the  royal  race  were  designedly,  harshly,  ami  in- 
hospitably treated  by  Rom.  officials."  Lange:  -'that 
Jos.  and  Mary  were  poor."  But  we  are  not  to  under- 
stand that  they  were  poor  or  oppressed  by  Rom.  authori- 
ties. It  was  simply  bee.  there  was  no  room  for  them  in 
the  inn.  Justin  Martyr  places  the  birth  in  a  cave.  The 
khan  wld.  probably,  remain  for  long  time  in  the  East. 
"  Land  and  Book  "  1,533;  (Thomson  quoted,  Andrews 
81  ;  Farrar  I,  3-6;  W.  Hepworth  Dixon's  Holy  Land,  I, 


31 


cli.  13).  Matt,  makes  no  reference  to  the  home,  but  speaks 
as  if  they  came  to  it  for  iir.st  time.  Lk,  represents  them 
as  livintr  there  beforehand.  Rationalists  ileuy  that  lie 
was  born  in  Beth.,  sa\'  that  he  was  born  in  Naz.  Strauss 
rejects  both  acc'ts.  Kenan  :  "  It  is  only  by  an  awkward 
detour  that  the  legetid  succeeds  in  fixing  his  birth  at 
Beth."  R.  says  that  the  royal  line  from  D.  had  become 
extinct,  but  that  Christ's  birth  must  be  fixed  at  Beth., 
bee.  of  prophecy.  Ans. :  (a)  The  acc'ts  are  not  contra- 
dictory but  coniplemental.  (h)  Matt,  calls  attention  to 
both  places,  sim]ily  to  speak  of  the  fultillraent  of  proph- 
ecy.    Lk.  gives  the  sequence  of  events. 

§8.  Design  of  annunciation  to  Shepherds,  Lk.  2:  17. 
Why  announce  his  birth  to  them  ?  1.  That  attention 
might  be  called  to  this  birth,  iH-44 he-press- of  business. 
2.  That  witnesses,  simple,  competent,  sufficiently  numer- 
and  disinterested,  might  sec  him,  3.  This  testimony 
must  not  be  accomplished  in  too  public  a  manner,  in  or- 
der not  to  foster  the  designs  of  Herod.  4.  The  attesta- 
tion is  miraculous,  by  angels.  5.  New  connection  is 
made  with  0.  T.  hist,  and  types.  These  shepherds  were 
feeding  their  flocks  on  the  same  hills  where  D.,  their 
father,  had  fed  his.  Christ,  the  new-born  king,  is  typi- 
tied,  who  should  feed  his  flocks  like  a  shepherd. 

Lange  finely  heads  this  as  "  The  first  Gospel  n])on 
Earth."  The' sign  (Lk.  2:  12)  is  not  supernatural,  but 
sufficiently  accurate,  for  among  the  children  born  that 
night  in  Beth.,  probably  not  more  than  one  would  have 
l)een  in  a  manger.  3  ways  of  reading  the  doxology  : 
(a)  Glory  to  God  in  the  highest,  and  on  earth  iiea(;e,  good- 
will toward  men. 
ib)      "         "         "     in  (among)  the  highest,  and  on  earth 

'peace,  good-will  toward  men. 
(c)       "  "  "     in  the  highest  and  on   Earth,  peace 

among  men  of  His  good-will. 

Here  we  meet  with  one  of  the  most  imp.  readings 
which  materially  affect  the  sense.  The  altered  reading, 
amonr/  the  men  of  His  r/ood-wiU  is  equivalent  to  the  elect  peo- 
ple. Valcknaer  :  "  men  with  whom  God  is  pleased."  Thus 
we  have  the  truth  that  zlor^vq  was  given  to  Jews  that 
through  them  it  might  be  a  joy  Tzavxi  riv  h).iu.  Some  con- 
trast dyyelo:  and  d)^dj)to-oc.     Th'e  latter  come  in,  after  the 


32 

former  had  completed  their  mission.  Argued:  that  the 
publicity  of  this  event  ought  to  have  prevented  subse- 
quent unbelief.  Ans.  Lk.  16  :  31.  Natarcdlslic  theorists, 
to  get  rid  of  the  supernatural,  say  that  the  Shepherds 
were  aware  of  the  condition  of  Mary  ;  they  saw  a  bright 
light  in  the  heavens,  and  mistook  it  for  the  glory  of  God. 
Mythical  theorists  (more  naturally^  :  All  this  was  looked 
for  bee.  of  prophecy,  which  required  the  scene  at  Beth. 
Wherefore,  subsequent  writers  embellish  it  with  honor 
given  to  Christ.  The  Shepherds  were  related  to  Da- id, 
and  therefore  they  were  made  use  of  more  than  other 
men.     Strauss  rejects  the  whole  thing. 

§0.  Circimicision  and  Presentation  in  the  Temple.  The 
chronolojrical  order  of  events  here  is  called  in  questi.:-'n. 
By  law,  circumcision  was  on  the  eighth  day,  and  presen- 
tation on  the  fortieth  day.  Now,  where  and  when  can 
be  inserted  "  the  adoration  of  the  Magi"  and  "  Flight  to 
Egypt?''  1.  Tradition  and  ecclesiastical  observance 
have  placed  them  before  the  presentation.  Obj.  :  Tra- 
dition not  old  enough.  2  Matt.  2:  1  seems  to  imply 
that  the  adoration  soon  fi)llowed  the  birth.  But  if  the 
arii'ument  proves  anything,  it  proves  that  it  was  on  niglit 
of  birth.  3.  Herod  was  ignorant  of  the  birth  until  the 
arrival  of  the  Magi  ;  but  if  presentation  had  occurred, 
he  would  have  heard  of  it.  This  is  merely  gratuitous. 
He  might  have  heard  and  paid  no  attention  to  it.  The 
visit  of  the  Magi  awakened  his  suspicions,  as  they  came 
from  distant  realms. 

Obj.  :  (1).  Time  inadequate.  Forty  days  required  be- 
tween birth  and  purification.  This  could  not  compre- 
hend the  coming  of  the  Magi  and  flight  to  Egypt.  (2). 
Presentation  could  not  have  occurred  subsequent  to  the 
slaughter  of  the  Innocents.  Even  after  Herod's  death, 
when  Joseph  heard  that  Archelaus  was  in  power,  he  was 
afraid  to  return.  Matt.  2:  22-23.  (rt)Hengstenburg  gets 
over  this  by  translating  "  he  went  there  with  fear." 
{b)  Ritual  view  puts  presentation  between  Magi's  visit 
and  flight.  But  1,  it  is  expressly  stated  that  the  visit  of 
Magi  caused  alarm  in  Jerusalem,  and  excited  Herod's 
fears.  2.  It  separates  between  Magi's  visit  and  flight, 
which  Matthew  connects  as  cause  and  efl:ect.  Hence, 
both  prove  fatal  to  the  Ritualistic  theory.     3.  Robinson, 


33 

SchafF,  &c.,  put  presentation  first.  Obj.:  Lnke  gives  no 
return  to  Bethleliein,  and  implies  the  return  to  Nazareth 
to  be  immediately  after  presentation. 

Ans. :  It  is  not  a  part  ot'Lnke's  plan.  He  only  main- 
tains the  consistency  of  his  own  narrative.  Fi-om  Beth- 
lehem to  Jerusalem  only  two  hours  journey,  and  there- 
fore unimportant  to  mention.  Negative  critics  hold  these 
two  lines  are  contradictions,  but  harmonists  that  eacli 
narrative  Hows  on  in  its  course,  yet  consistent,  and  form- 
ing one  l)eautiful  whole. 

Presentation  in  the  Temple. — The  design  is  four-fold.  1. 
Showed  obedience  to  the  law  by  puritication  of  the  Vir- 
gin and  redemption  of  first  born.  Obj.  :  Jesus  was  a 
priest,  and  therefore  it  was  illegal.  Argument  of  no 
force,  as  Jesus  was  not  a  Levite  to  wliom  tlie  law  was 
prescriiied.  Hence  Jesus  rendered  no  formal  service  as 
redemption  of  first-born  was  necessary.  2.  A  new  op- 
portunity' for  testimonj'  to  inspiration,  given  by  Simeon 
and  Anna.  3.  It  spread  the  report  of  his  birth.  4.  Re- 
cognition of  the  spiritual  Israel.  It  is  worthy  of  notice 
here,  that  these  examples  and  testimonies  are  scattered 
the  country  over.  Zachariah  and  Elizabeth  in  the  south, 
Joseph  and  Mary  in  the  north,  Simeon  and  Anna  at  the 
metropolis.  It  is  objected  on  the  ground  of  discrepancy 
that  ver.  24  gives  the  sacrifice  as  due  from  tlie  mother, 
while  ver.  27  does  not  mention  the  redemption-money 
for  the  child.  Every  woman  at  purification  presented  a 
lamb  and  a  dove  for  sacrifice,  but  in  case  of  poverty,  an 
additional  dove  was  substituted  for  the  lamb.  The  latter 
having  been  made  bv  Marj',  betrays  indigence.  Ver.  22 
makes  autoju  refer  to  mhoni  ?  I^ot  Joseph.  But  there  is 
no  difficulty  in  applying /a^aortr/ioi)  to  Jesus,  because  He 
represented  His  people.  It  is  not  positively  stated  that 
Simeon  was  far  advanced  in  j-ears.  Some  suppose  he 
was  Rabbin  Simeon.     Some  interesting  points  just  here. 

1.  The  fact  of  inspiration  shown  in  the  promise  that 
he  should  see  the  Messiah.  2.  The  clear  recognition  in 
Simeon's  words  of  the  fact  announced  in  the  angelic  do.K- 
ologyofthe  universal  application  of  our  Lord's  work. 
3.  Prophecy  verified.  4.  His  sufierings  foretold.  These 
four  points  teach  three  things:,  (1).  Rejection  by  the 
Jews.     (2).   Calling  of  the  Gentiles.     (3).  His  sacrificial 


34 

character.  We  also  infer  that  tribal  relations  wore  not 
all  lost,  as  Anna  is  mentioned  as  belongino-  to  tlie  tribe 
of  Aser.  Fasting  and  |)rayer  to  l)e  understood  literally 
and  not  of  an  ascetic  order,  as  the}-  simply  mean  Anna 
led  a  religions  life.  The  sceptical  objections  here  are  lame. 
The  Mythists  assert  that  the  motive  for  miracles  in  the 
narrative  was  a  desire  to  exalt  Ciirist  on  the  part  of  later 
writers.  This  alone  they  say  was  the  cause  for  the  multi- 
jdicity  of  miracles. 

§10.  Adoration  of  the  Magi.  Matt.  2  :  1-12.  According 
to  the  most  approved  plan,  this  belongsj^w^verses  33-39 
ofLk.  2.  Its  sigiiiHcation  is  the  counterpart  of  the  last. 
The  time  after  presentation  was  brief,  as  Herod's  death 
soon  followed.  The  adoration  of  the  Magi  represents 
His  acknowledgment  by  the  Gentiles.  They  could  not 
have  been  Jews.  Their  question  was,  where  is  He  who 
is  born  King  of  the  Jews?  The  salient  change  in  the 
church  at  this  time  was  the  calling  of  the  Gentiles.  N.  T. 
dispensation  is  of  grace,  lience  universal,  and  not  an  ac- 
cident of  its  condition,  but  an  inward  change  in  the 
essential  character  of  the  dispensation.  O.  T.  prepara- 
tory and  honored  in  its  being  superseded.  Care  was 
taken  that  He  did  honor  to  tiie  law — the  O.  T.  Like- 
wise in  the  fullillment  of  prophecy  and  calling  of  the 
Gentiles.  Christ  was  apprehended  by  the  Magi  as  the 
king,  and  they  tendered  Ilim  royal  gifts.  This  custom 
common  to  the  East.  Divinely  guided,  hence  it  is  nat- 
ural to  infer  that  they  cherished  a  real  faith  in  the  Son 
of  God,  but  not  so  clear  as  was  possible  after  the  resur- 
rection.    By  some  it  is  thought  the  gifts  were  significant. 

1.  Gold   significant  of  royalty,   authority,   sovereignty. 

2.  Frankincense  of  prayer  and  intercession,  thus  recog- 
nizing him  as  the  hearer  and  answerer  of  supplication. 

3.  Myrrh,  being  a  favorite  anodyne  and  antiseptic,  had 
reference  to  his  sufferings  and  resurrection  ;  hence  the 
incorruptibility  of  his  nature,  and  the  promise  that  his 
body  should  not  see  corruption.  The  mother  accepted 
the  gifts  as  His  due.  Tradition  has  greatly  embellished 
this  event.  The  three. donors  represent  three  different 
races,  viz :  Shem,  Ham,  and  Japheth.  In  pictures,  one 
is  represented  as  a  negro.  But  more  important  than  these 
traditionary  views  we  shall  observe  1.  The  Magi,  called 


35 

lidyoe  rlTzb  d.vaTo)x7)v.  On'ginallv,  a  tribe  of  Medes  set  apart 
fur  priests,  same  as  the  Levites  among  tiie  Jews.  Thev 
embodied  tlie  leariiiiioj  of  the  people.  Tlieir  kiiowled^'e 
consisted  principally  of  astroloii^y.  2.  The  country  "of 
their  abode  the  text  leaves  uncertain.  Three  liave  been 
,o^iven,  Arabia,  Mesopotamia,  Persia.  The  last  best. 
Notice  the  chanofefrom  avr/.-(>y?uwv  to  aydrolrj.  Both  forms 
are  used  as  definite  geographical  expressions.  A\>rj-olujv 
is  tlie  far-east  Persia.  Avaxokq,  east  Babylonia.  Observe 
the  representatives  of  tlie  race  are  chosen  from  the  cradle 
of  tlie  race.  The  Greeks  and  Romans  were  too  impure 
and  familiar  with  the  Jews,  and  treited  them  with  con- 
teujiit.  Barorrians  were  too  ignorant.  The  east  chosen 
because  the  cradle  of  science.  The  writings  of  Zoroaster 
come  nearer  to  the  Holy  Scriptures  than  any  others.  3. 
What  brought  the  Magi  ?  Phenomena  natural  or  super- 
natural? I'revailing  belief,  natural.  To  its  being  mi- 
raculous it  is  objected  :  (r/j  Nowhere  taught  in  the'text. 
[h)  Magi  saw  the  star  in  the  East,  If  seen  in  the  Ea-t  it 
could  not  go  before  Ihem.  To  remove  this  ditficulty  read 
ver.  2:  "  while  we  were  in  the  East  &c."  (r)  They  weie 
not  led  to  X.  but  came  to  Him.  Not  guided  to  Bethlehem 
until  they  asked  for  tlie  child.  When  directed  again  to 
Bm,  they  saw  the  star  the  second  time.  Popular  tradition 
is  that  the  star  led  them.  Ans  :  Kepler  the  iirst  to  sug- 
gest the  natural  explanation  in  1604.  (See  Andrews 
pp.  9-10).  He  observed  in  that  year  a  conjunction 
of  Jupiter  and  Saturn,  in  Pisces,  in  Dec.  1603.  Mars  was 
added  in  the  following  spring,  and  a  new  star  of  surpass- 
ing brillianc}'  appeared  in  the  autumn  of  1604.  In  747 
A.  U.  C.  there  were  three  such  conjunctions  of  Jupiter 
and  Saturn,  and  Mars  w.as  added  in  748  A.  U,  C.  Both 
of  these  conjunctions  have  been  supposed  to  be  the  star 
of  the  Magi.  Habbi  Abarbanel  states  that  the  same  thing 
occurred  at  the  birth  of  Moses,  and  also  in  1463,  which 
led  him  to  look  for  the  birth  of  the  Messiah  in  his  own 
day.  Wieseler  says  it  was  a  new  star  iu  749  and  750, 
and  finds  it  recorded  in  the  Chinese  annals.  This  clashes 
with  Zumpt,  whose  theory  is  determined  \)y  the  date  that 
Cyrenius  was  governor  of  Syria,  as  previously  stated, 
Ques  :  How  is  this  star  to  be  associated  with  X's  birth? 
Ans:  1.  They  knew  this  was  the  part  of  the  heavens 


36 

which  belonged  to  Joclea.  2.  A  prevailing  expectation 
at  the  time  tor  a  Deliverer,  who  sliould  appear  in  Judea. 
(Vide  Suetonius  and  Tacitus).  3.  Collateral  traditions 
from  common  souices  of  knowledge.  Oliin.cse  sages,  33 
years  later,  coming  west,  inquired  for  the  long  expected 
and  common  Saviour.  4.  These  were  combined  with 
Jewish  exjjectations.  Jews  were  scattered  widely  over 
the  world,  who  spread  knowledge  of  God  and  Messianic 
predictions,  David  and  Daniel  had  prophesied  of  Him. 
\n  Xum.  24:  17  and  Is.  60:  o,  lie  is  spoken  of  under 
the  figure  of  a  star.  Mary  applies  N.  24:  17  to  X. 
Balaam's  words  may  have  been  handed  down  outside  of 
the  church.  These  passages  may  have  given  shape  to 
astronomical  expectations  rejative  to  X.  Hence  the  Magi 
were  natural!}'  led  to  observe  heavenly  i)henoniena. 
Hengstenberg  objects.  1.  aarr^p  is  applicable  to  only 
one  bod}',  and  o.arpov  to  a  constellation.  The  former  is 
true,  but  the  use  of  the  latter  is  wide.  2.  Kepler  has 
been  reviewed  by  Pritchard.  He  says  conjnnction  in  no 
case  was  perfect.  Tlie  stars  always  se[)arated  l>y  two 
diameters  of  the  moon  between.  Ans:  Still,  the  phe- 
nomenon was  very  remarkable  as  well  as  the  coincidence 
of  his  calculations.  The  two  planets  came  together  about 
tliree  hours  and  a  half  before  sunrise,  and  lience  in  the 
East.  The  tirst  appearance  would  be  seen  in  the  East 
May  20,  747,  just  before  sunrise.  The  second  in  Xov. 
five  months  later  in  the  south,  at  8  P.  M.:  hence  star  ap- 
peared toward  Bm.  The  former  indicated  the  birth, 
the  latter  the  way  to  Bm.  This  involves  those  who  claim 
747  in  all  the  chronological  difficulty  to  whicli  we  have 
referred.  Accordingly,  the  birth  of  X.  is  put  three  years 
earlier,  and  makes  Him  33  years  at  Baptism.  Therefore 
the  Magi  did  not  probably  set  out  at  the  first  appearance, 
but  delayed  some  time.  Again,  trie  term  of  Quirinus 
was  not  earlier  than  750,  whereas  this  makes  nativity 
three  years  before.  But  the  taxing  might  have  been  four 
years  earlier  than  750.  The  only  alternative  for  this 
naturalistic  explanation  is  to  adopt  the  theory  of  a  new 
star,  natural  or  miraculous.  3.  Objections  :  Why  should 
Herod  slaughter  3  year  old  children?  As  the  first  star 
was  only  five  months  before,  therefore  we  must  agree 
that  star  at  Bm.  was  a   new  star  or  a  miraculous   one. 


Milton  supposes  a  leadiiio^  of  the  rajs;  Dr.  Pritclfard  the 
ijoiiig  and  standin^:^  of  the  star  was  in  consequence  of  the 
Magi's  journeying- and  arrival  ;  Dr.  Alexander  that  the 
words  mean  they  saw  the  star  again  on  the  road  to  Bni. 
and  thus  coniirined  their  hopes,  and  hence  it  was  a  star 
seeming  to  go  hefore  them.  4.  God  would  not  use  their 
false  notions  of  astrology  for  such  an  end.  Strauss  asks, 
Is  astrology  wrong  elsewhere  but  right  in  this  case  ? 
Ans  :  God  employs  men  as  the}'  are,  bringing  good  out 
of  evil.  Also,  astrolog}^  was  then  considered  as  associa- 
ted with  all  true  astronomy-.  It  embodied  true  science. 
Astrology  and  Alchemy  embraced  all  that  was  known  of 
science.  There  are  perplexing  ditiiculties  either  way. 
Still,  the  astrological  phenomena  must  have  given  cor- 
roboration to  the  expectations  for  the  Messiah.  Observ- 
ed at  the  time  of  birth,  and  hence  they  turnish  collateral 
evidence  to  the  time  of  the  nativity. 

Mythists  assert  the  whole  to  be  a  myth.  Arabian  mer- 
chants befriended  the  parents  in  their  poverty.  The  magi 
were  fixed  upon,  as  they  were  astronomers  ;  and  star,  be- 
cause of  O.  T.  passages  referring  to  a  great  light,  and 
which  were  literallv  understood.  The  gifts  referred  to 
Isaiah  60  :  6.  " 

As  to  the  general  effect,  Herod  and  the  city  were  trou- 
bled. The  wise  men  of  the  Jews  called  and  questioned, 
and  replied,  "  Christ  was  to  be  born  in  Bm."'  Mic,  5  :  2. 
Note  the  difference  in  reading  between  Micah  and  Matt. 
A  striking  illustration  of  two  opposites  meaning  the 
same  thing.  Warned  of  God  in  a  dream,  the  magi 
avoided  Ilerod  and  returned  home  another  way. 

§11.  FUfi  lit  into  Eg II pi  —  Herod's  Cm  tit  i/ —  The  Return. 
Matt.  2  :  13-23.  Besides  saving  tlie  child's  life,  it  sym- 
bolically embodies  the  great  truth  that  the  Messiah  was 
to  suffer.  Hitherto  all  peaceful.  Except  poverty  and 
humility,  nothing  as  yet  indicated  His  suffering.  The 
design  of  the  flight  is  five-fold.  1.  To  introduce  the  suf- 
fering element.  2.  Christ's  kingly  office  set  forth. 
I'rincely  honors  bestowed.  3.  O.  and  N.  T.  typical 
relations  established.  Egypt  was  a  refuge,  being  near 
and  under  Roman  power.  Moses  was  saved  there,  where 
also  was  the  transitional  state, of  the  church  from  the 
family    to  the   nation.       Church   came  up  out  of  Egypt 


38 

when  preserved.  Now  in  danirer  clmroli  repairs  there 
again.  Ciirist  is  saved.  4.  In  Egypt,  IIos.  11  :  1  fulfil- 
led. Obj'n  :  mi&api)lieatipn.  Ans  :  The  ealiiiig  of  Israel 
from  Egypt  bears  a  ty[neal  relation  to  Christ,  o.  New 
evidence  uf  miraculous  care  observed  for  the  child.  Jo- 
seph consjiicuous,  as  evidence  for  miraculous  conception, 
and  pi-eservation.     Hence  he  is  too  much  nnderi'ated. 

3Iasscu-rc  of  the  Innocents.  Objections  :  1,  Herod  defeat- 
ed his  [)ur])ose  b}^  inqniiiug  of  the  Magi.  Too  cunning 
for  this.  Better  accom])lished  by  seci'tt  messenger,  &c. 
2.  Silence  of  contemitoi-aneous  history.  Could  sucli  {cru- 
elty escape  notice  ?  No,  say  negative  critics.  Josejihus 
and  Roman  historians  mak(?  no  record  of  it.  Answer  : 
Whatever  was  unpleasant  to  Ronian  ears  Josephus  was 
careful  to  omit.  Roman  historians  did  not  mention  it 
because  they  liad  no  sympathy  with  Jewish  hist'y.  Again, 
tliis  was  only  as  a  drop  in  the  bucket  as  (compared  with 
Herod's  cruelties.  Through  jealousy  he  killed  his  wife 
and  sons.  Wlien  dying  he  issued  orders  to  destroy  his 
nobles,  that  there  might  be  weeping  at  his  death. 

The  wise  men  mocked  Herod.  Pride,  ambition  and 
fear  caused  him  to  kill  all  the  male  children,  roue  "nctoa.^. 
No  mention  of  secrecy.  From  two  years  old  and  under 
cannot  be  limited  to  those  beginning  their  second  year, 
nor  can  it  be  said  Christ  was  two  years  old.  If  tlie  child 
had  just  been  seen  by  the  Magi,  why  those  two  yrs.  old 
and  under?  Herod  would  have  killed  enougli  children 
without  extending  his  order  to  those  two  ^-ears  old.  Ans. 
Prophecy  was  thus  fulfilled,  Jer.  31  :  15.  Objected  again 
that  the  prophecy  is  misapplied.  Rachel  is  poetically 
represented  as  rising  from  tlie  grave,  owing  to  the  depor- 
tation of  captives  at  Ramah,  the  descendants  of  Jos.  and 
Benj.  Here  as  rising  to  weep  for  the  massacre  of  the 
innocents  at  Bm.  Ans.  :  Typical  connection  between 
the  two  events.  As  to  the  number  of  children  slaugh- 
tered, sceptics  exaggerate.  Voltaire  says  14,000.  Anti- 
quarians estimate  the  population  by  measurement  of 
space.  This  necessarily  is  liable  to  mislead.  Vai'iously 
estimated  about  90,  10,  or  12.     Smallest  most  probable. 

Mytliists,  &c.,  say  all  heroic  persons  passed  thi'ough 
dangers  during  infancy  and  childhood.  Romulus,  Remus, 
Cyrus,  &c.     Hence  the  eventful  infancy  of  Christ,  or,  it 


39 

was  a  pure  invention  to  connect  it  with  Moses  and  Heb'wg 
in  Eiivpt.  The  place  of  sojourn  is  unknown.  Traditions 
clash.  Some,  near  IIeIioi)olis ;  others,  at  Memphis. 
Nor  is  the  duration  of  the  sojourn  fullj  known.  Varies 
as  the  date  of  birth  by  different  critics.  The  return  was 
soon  after  Herod's  death,  as  Jos.  had  not  heard  of  his 
successor.  We  may  note  Math.'s  agreement  with  con- 
temporaneous liist.  Period  of  intricate  changes,  yet  no 
mistake  is  made.  Herod's  territory  divided  into  three 
parts.  Herod  Antipas,  tetrarch  over  Galilee  and  Perea; 
Archelaus:  Judea,  Idumea  and  Samaria.  Herod  had 
ap{)ointed  Archelaus  king,  but  Augustus  allowed  him  the 
title  of  Ethnarch.  Philip  was  allotted  Trachonitis,  Au- 
ranites.  The  gospel  narrative  moves  through  all  these 
witliout  a  single  blunder. 

It  was  Joseph's  intention  to  return  to  Bm.  Warned 
in  a  dream  to  return  again  to  N"azureth.  Propliecy  ful- 
filled, Jud.  13  :  5.     That  Nazareth  is  never  mentioned  in 

0.  T.  is  based  [lartly  on  the  etymology  of  the  word.  Sup- 
posed to  be  from  a  Heb.  word  meanin.g  n  twig ;  otliers 
from  a  word  signifying  a  crown.  Allusion  to  Is.  11  :  1 
compared  with  53  :  3.  Messiah  to  be  a  twig  from  the 
prostrate  stem  of  Jesse,  i.  e.,  of  humble  origin.  There 
is  reference  to  the  reputation  of  the  town.  "  Can  an3^ 
good  come  out  of  Nazareth  ?"  Christ  fulfilled  prophecy 
by  living  tliere.  The  return  and  settlement  at  Nazareth 
close  the  period  of  infancy. 

The  peculiarities  of  this  first  subdivision  of  the  prepar- 
atory period  are  heightened  by  the  silence  that  followed. 

1.  Alatt.  and  Lk.  combine  to  form  a  unit,  fitting  like  a  lock 
and  key.  2.  The  supernatural  and  historical  elements 
are  one.  If  miracles,  they  must  be  received  on  liistorical 
evidence.  Bleek  says  Christians  cannot  but  expect 
Christ's  entrance  into  tlie  world  accoTupanied  by  peculiar 
signs.  3.  The  attempt  to  discredit  is  based  on  subjective 
and  rationalistic  grounds,  i.  e.,  difficulty  to  believe,  vary- 
ing with  the  individual.  Critics  argue  in  circulo.  The 
choice  is  between  Matt,  and  Strauss.  4.  The  historical 
characteristics  already  justified  in  connecting  with  O.  T. 
The  typical  and  symbolical  exhibited,  and  facts  imply 
and  embody  truths,  which  were  brought  out. 

Second  Siibdidsion  of  Preparaior>/  Period.— Its  limits  com- 
prise the  return  and  end  of  30  years  of  quiet  life  at  Naz- 


40 

aretb,  or  settlement  at  ISTazareth  to  commencement  of 
mini.'^try.  Profound  silence.  No  uninspired  writer  could 
refiaiii  from  liis  own  interpolations.  Hence  the  contrast 
between  apocrypha  and  N.  T.  Desi2;n  of  the  silence. 
1.  Essential  to  have  a  fuil  account  of  Christ's  origin,  liis 
ministry,  public  work  and  sacrifice.  To  this  tlie  g-ospels 
correspond.  2.  Period  of  growth,  not  work.  Just  enough 
presented  to  maintain  hist,  connection.  Silence  a  check 
upon  those  who  w^ould  dwell  on  unimportant  truths. 
More  would  have  been  gratification  of  curiosity'  to  which 
sacred  historians  never  descend.  Otherwise  the  narrative 
would  be  impaired.  3.  Such  given  as  adds  to  our  ideas 
of  Christ.  Two  extremes  to  be  avoided  :  (a)  That  Christ 
learned  nothingin  a  natural  way,  but  all  superiiaturnl,even 
to  reading  and  writing.  Thisview  unwarranted  b}- facts, 
and  unnecessar}'  to  his  divinity.  (/>)  Naturalistic.  This 
exalts  liis  mental  [)owers  to  the  exclusion  of  the  divine. 
This  untrue,  as  the  people  wondered  at  his  wisdom,  hav- 
ing never  learned.  Narrative  says  "  he  taught  not  as  one 
taught  by  the  scribes."  He  probably  lived  and  learned 
as  other  boys.  Supposed  to  have  learned  his  father's 
trade.     Mk.  6  :  3.     See  Dr.  Alexander. 

Gospel  Lessons. — 1.  Early  life  uneventful.  2.  Growth, 
not  action.  Grew  in  wisdom  and  stature.  3.  He  grew 
in  favor  with  unbelieving  Galileans,  who  knew  him  best. 
His  brethren  the  most  difficult  to  persuade,  and  his 
townsmen  sought  twice  to  kill  him.  They  were  scan- 
dalized by  his  assuming  superiority.  Tliere  was  no 
unnatural  and  repulsive  precocity  in  him.  He  possessed 
a  perfect  human  nature.  Early  Fathers  say  he  had  no 
personal  beauty,  based  on  Is.  53:  2.  Later  view  founded 
on  Ps,  45.     4.  The  most  important  is  the  following  : 

§12.  Visit  to  the  Pa.s.sowr.— Lk.  2  :  41-52.  This  "single 
paragraph  presents  the  fact  of  his  extraordinary  powers. 
Were  it  not  for  this,  there  would  be  room  for  the  asser- 
tion that  Christ  received  no  miraculous  gift  till  Baptism. 
The  event  marks  a  transition  in  his  consciousness.  The 
growing  boy,  full  of  heavenly  wisdom,  seeking  after 
knowledge,  kind  to  his  parents,  obedient  in  all  things. 
Olshausen  beautifully  says,  "  He  was  a  perfect  boy,  per- 
fect man."  A  marked  arrival  of  fuller  consciousness  of 
his  mission  is  also  noticeable.     Impressed  with  his  desti- 


41 

ny.  Ill  analoecy  with  human  experience.  Christ  had  a 
child  knowledo;e  of  himself.  Now  a  youth's  experience, 
tlien  the  sudden  mental  changes,  of  which  a  youth  is 
often  conscious.  Hence  glimpses  of  a  portentous  future. 
How  or  when  came  to  Jesus  the  consciousness  of  liis 
Messiahship  we  ai-e  not  told.  It  must  have  been  gradual. 
A  sinless  being,  with  a  knowledge  of  sin,  yet  pure,  and 
conscious  of  difference  between  himself  and  others, 
Reading  the  law,  and  yet  having  perfect  love  to  God  ; 
the  types  and  prophecies  of  O.  T.  and  conscious  of  their 
fulfillment  in  liimself.  A  gradual  conception  of  his  Mes- 
sianic character  must  have  been  wrought  in  liin).  There 
are  evident  traces  however,  when  touching  upon  great 
truths,  of  modern  flashes  gleaming  in  upon  his  soul. 
This  is  one,  and  those  at  Baptism  and  on  Mt.  of  Trans. 

At  this  point  the  "  Lives  of  Christ  "  open  themselves. 
The  authors  show  what  is  to  be  their  tiieory  of  the  per- 
son of  X.,  upon  which  they  explain  the  events  of  his  life. 
Rationalists  deny  or  explain  away  the  supernatural. 
Orthodox  wi-iters  vary.  It  is  important  to  know  the 
author's  standpoint,  and  guard  against  misiijterpretation 
of  forms  of  statement.  Ebrard,  Pressense,  and  Beecher 
explain  by  the  xii^  roffc^  theory,  which  is  a  self-limitation, 
or  self-'^mptying  of  the  Logos.  Divine  and  human  one 
and  tlie  same.  Not  two  natures,  but  one.  Distinction 
made  betvvepii  essential  nature  and  attributes.  X.  was 
God  essentially  and  potentially,  but  emptied  liimself  of 
his  Divine  contents.  A  babe  like  any  other  babe.  Void 
of  ideas,  was  a  bundle  of  germs  which  developed  through- 
out his  whole  life,  and  at  exaltation  his  Divinity  fully 
restored.  The  human  developed  into  the  Divine  ;  the 
Infinite  having  become  finite,  and  the  finite  growing  back 
into  the  Infinite.  This  theory  denies  the  real  humanity 
of  X.,  robs  him  of  human  sympathy.  X.  is  an  uiideified 
God. 

Others  lower  X's  humanity  by  separating  it  too  much 
from  his  divinity.  He  possessed  all  of  our  humanity, 
but  the  converse  is  not  true.  Hence  his  was  not  ours, 
but  his  own.  Yet  ours  touches  his.  For  this  view,  two 
reasons.  1.  He  was  sinless,  therefore  his  capacities  un- 
like ours.  We  do  not  know  what  sinless  humanity  is, 
2,  He  was  Divine,  and  two  natures  in  his   person,  there- 


42 

fore  above  ns.  All  he  did  was  not  as  a  mere  man.  The 
human  infineiiced  hythe  divine,  and  hence  all  he  did  was 
done  by  God.  Illustration:  A  Christian  is  exalted, 
owing  ro  the  indwelling  of  the  H.  G.  So  X.,  though  a 
man,  is  exalted,  by  a  personal  union  with  the  Father  and 
H.  G.  Hence  as  a  man  is  intinitelj  above  any  other 
man,  Paul  maintains  this  in  Hebrews,  as  the  ground  of 
the  infinite  value  of  his  sacritice.  It  is  possible  to  so 
view  X.  as  to  conceive  of  him  as  sustaining  a  double  per- 
sonalltii.  Mojit  of  the  "  Lives  of  Christ  "  are  based  on 
German  theories,  largely  tainted  with  this  speculation. 
This  is  growing  common  with  tlie  Baptists.  We  study 
him  not  merely  as  coinciding  with  our  views  of  his 
nature,  but  as  a  true  man,  developing  according  to  his 
nature,  acting  and  acted  upon. 

Jesus  went  up  to  tlie  temple  with  his  parents.  At  12 
Jewish  boys  became  "  sons  of  the  law,"  and  took  part  in 
the  feasts  &c.  The  country  was  safe  from  former  dan- 
gers. When  X  was  about  10,  Archelaus  was  banished 
to  Gaul.  The  government  in  the  hands  of  procurators, 
subordinate  to  governor  of  Syria,  and  thus  Galilee,  Sama- 
ria and  Judea  were  under  Roman  protection.  The 
parents  returned  from  Passover  but  Jesus  stayed  behind. 
They  had  proceeded  a  day's  journey  before  they  missed 
him,  thinking  he  was  with  his  kinsmen.  Failing  to  dis- 
cover his  whereabouts,  they  returned  to  the  city.  Found 
him  the  third  day  at  the  temple,  "'sitting  in  the  midst  of  the 
doctors."  "  Sitting"  does  not  necessarily  imply  equality. 
Strauss  says  it  is  unnatural  that  a  boy  of  12  should  be 
instructing  men,  that  a  scholar  would  have  stood.  "Hear- 
ing and  asking"  imply  instructing.  Ans  :  Nothing  in 
the  narrative  inconsistent  with  an  intelligent  boy,  pure 
and  curious  for  knowledge.  Scholar  standing  was  not 
customary.  The  mother's  question  shows  their  mutual 
relation.  It  is  beautiful,  rexvou,  t:  irrocYjaa:;  rj/jJu  6'jt(0(:  ; 
The  reply  is  variously  interpreted.  The  grammar  admits 
of  two.  Some  supply  ellipsis  locally — "Why  did  yon 
look  elsewhere,  did  you  not  know  I  would  be  in  my 
Father's  house?"  Better:  "in  my  Father's  affairs." 
and  thus  at  the  Temple,  as  the  article  is  indeiinite.  The 
first  recorded  words  of  X.,  and  an  acknowledgment  of 
God  as  his  Father.     Others  affirm   that  at  this  juncture 


43 

the  conscionsness  of  his  destiny  became  more  real.  Pre- 
viously lie  had  been  passive,  but  not  so  now.  Best 
humanitarians  claim  the  words  are  expressive  of  penetra- 
ting insio-lit  into  his  divine  mission.  We  may  remark 
that  the  incident  serves  to  enhance  our  interest  occasion- 
ed by  his  miraculous  birth.  The  parental  anxiety, inquiry 
for  a  lost  cliild,  public  place  where  he  was  found,  were 
all  calculated  to  arouse  thouglits  in  the  parent's  minds. 

Critical  Objections.  1.  Unnatural  that  his  mother  should 
lose  him.  Ans  :  He  was  old  enough  to  take  care  of  him- 
self. Easily  lost  in  a  large  crowd.  2.  Unnatural  that  he 
should  cause  his  mother  so  great  anxiety,  and  then  give 
her  such  a  reply.  Ans  :  Replj'  not  rough,  but  a  gentle 
admonition  that  her  claims  were  subordinate  to  a  higher 
duty.  3.  If  the  circumstances  of  conception  were  true, 
the  mother  could  not  fail  to  comprehend  his  answer. 
Ans:  Mary  may  not  have  fully  known  what  he  meant. 
12  years  could  have  glided  by  with  nothing  extraordina- 
ry. Hence  the  origin  of  the  Mythical  interpretation, 
based  on  Moses  and  Samuel.  From  the  narrative,  we 
learn  that  he  returned  to  ISTazareth  and  was  subject  to 
his  parents. 

Joseph's  death.  Supposed  to  have  died  soon  after  this. 
Not  mentioned  again.  ApociTphal  gospels  say  he  died 
wlien  Jesus  was  19.  Evidently  dead  at  the  time  of  cru- 
cifixion, as  Jesus  gave  his  mother  into  John's  care. 

Whj/  Nazareth  chosen  as  abode  f  1.  To  fulfill  prohecy. 
2.  It  was  his  parents'  home.  3  It  afforded  safety. 
Greater  danger  in  Jerusalem.  4.  Could  gain  more  influ- 
ence in  Galilee  than  in  Jerns.  under  the  Pharisaic  eye. 
5.  Isolated  from  Jewish  instruction,  he  is  supposed  to 
have  been  taught  of  Ggd.  His  wisdom  given  by  inspira- 
tion. 6.  Reared  where  the  scenes  of  his  public  ministry 
were  to  be  chiefly  laid.  Renan:  "The  whole  Galilean 
ministry  was  within  sight  of  his  youthful  home."  Pres- 
ent Nazareth  consists  of  3000  inhabitants.  It  lies  in  a 
narrow  valley,  shut  in  between  two  rocks.  North  of  the 
Esdraelon  plain,  the  hill  looks  n.  e.  to  Ilermon.  There- 
fore the  view  was  familiar  to  him  when  looking  towards 
the  snovv-ca[>ped  Hermon,  the  northernmost  point  of  X's 
work.  The  eastern  view  confronted  by  Tabor,  west 
by  Carmel  and  the  sea.  The  southern  by  Gilboa  and 
Samaria. 


§13.  Genealogies.  Mth.  1 :  1-17  :  Lk.  3  :  23-38.  The 
importance  of  these  lies  in  the  necessity  to  prove  X's 
Messianic  chiinis.  The  Jewisli  o:;eneaIogies  were  sacredly 
kept  and  open  to  all.  Strauss  considers  them  fraudulent, 
and  that  they  involve  difficulties,  heing  opposed  to  0.  T. 
Hence  no  proof  of  Christ's  Davidic  descent.  1.  On  the 
contrary,  the  royal  line  could  not  be  obscure.  People, 
would  have  guarded  the  royal  seed  as  He  was  to  descend 
from  David.  This  was  the  promise.  If  Christ  had  been 
of  Davidic  descent,  he  would  have  been  hailed  as  Mes- 
siah. Ans  :  ]^o  theocratic  rulers  on  account  of  sin.  2. 
Birth  at  Bm.  was  not  generally  believed,  nor  does  Jesus 
reply  to  tliis.  Joim  7  :  42.  A  Xazarene,andso  he  passes  in 
Gospels  and  Acts.  Ans  :  Nowhere  else  charged,  not  in 
Sanhedrim.  Were  the  charge  sul)stantial,  it  would  have 
been  fatal  to  him.  He  was  not  ignorant  of  his  lineage, 
as  he  calls  himself  jOarfc/'s  son.  Peter  at  Pentecost,  tlie 
Acts  and  Epistles  use  it.  Strauss  says  title  is  officially 
no  real  fact.-  3.  I*To  concurrent  testimony,  no  reference 
to  Ebionites.  Ans:  Abundant  pi-oof  without  the  gene- 
alogies. "The  son  of"  or  "  begat"  not  limited  to  literal 
relationship  of  father  and  son.  This  true  when  line  runs 
out.  This  remark  clarities  Mth.'s  gene;ilogy.  Remote 
ancestors  called  fathers  when  distinct  line  vanishes. 
Case:  Math,  says  "Jacob  begat  Joseph."  Lk.,  "Joseph 
was  the  son  of  Heli."  No  literalness  here.  Again,  Mth. 
speaks  of  three  divisions  of  fourteen  genealogies  each. 
Difficulty.  But  the  most  obvious  way  to  remove  it  is  to 
count  David  twice.  Another  difficulty.  In  second  table 
four  kings  omitted  which  Chronicles  supplies,  thus  mak- 
ing eighteen  generations  instead  of  fourteen.  Therefore 
"  so  all  the  generations"  must  mean  all  given  in  Mth. 
Charge  of  ignorance  absurd,  as  every  child  in  Judea 
knew  the  royal  list  better  than  we  do  the  Presidential, 
or  the  royal  line  of  Gt.  Britain.  But  why  fourteen  ?  1.  To 
aid  memory.  2.  Symbolic  value  of  the'nnmber  of  letters, 
which  were  fourteen.  David=14.  ]>,  V^,  D*  =  14.  3. 
Periods  chronologically  equal.  Untrue,  because  the  first 
period  is  twice  as  long  as  the  other  two.  4.  These 
periods  of  national  history.  This  the  most  satisfactory, 
i.e.,  the  theocratic  descent.  What  names  omitted  and 
why  ?     Amaziah,  Joash  and  Ahaziah,  occurring  between 


(      ^  ^  ^^-a^n^'  ?^^ur^J  ^^try^u^Y   C^^^^-*''^/  /ou)'iy\^ 


45 

Jorarn  and  Ozias.  Some  say  because  they  descended 
from  Jezebel,  and  others  because  they  were  mere  ciphers. 
Jelioiachim  omitted  as  captivity  began  in  liis  reign,  or 
because  made  king  by  a  foreign  power.  Objection  to 
Mth.  1 :  11.  Jechonias  had  no  brethren.  Ans:  Breth- 
ren may  mean  contemporaries.  Again  Jechonias  had  no 
children,  hence  not  the  ftuher  of  Sahithiel.  "  Write  the 
man  childless."  Jer.  22  :  23.  Perhaps  this  meant  he 
should  lack  in  a  direct  line  of  successors  to  the  throne. 
All  these  little  difficulties  sufficiently  accounted  for. 

Discrepancks  hetween  Mth.  and  Lk.  1.  Mth's  genealogy 
opens  the  narrative  and  was  probably  copied.  Lk's  is 
introduced  as  a  i)art  of  X's  i)ersonal  history.  2.  Mth.  de- 
scends while  Lk.  ascends.  3.  Math,  traces  the  royal  line, 
Lk.  the  natural  to  Adam.  4.  Lk.  fuller  than  M'th.,  giv- 
ing 42  names  to  Mth's  2S.  To  David  the  lists  agree. 
Difficulty  :  Between  Salmon  and  David  only  three  names 
occur  for  400  or  500  years.  Same  dif.  in  Ruth,  and 
hence  another  instance  of  contradiction.  Ans:  Names 
omitted.     Said  that  Raliab  was  anothei"  line  than  Jewish. 

Dlcergence  of  lincnr/e  froin  iJcrid  (/.oiimii'an/.  Mth.  fol- 
lows Solomon.  Lk.  Nathan.  Two  hypotheses  :  1.  Both 
Mth.  and  Lk.  give  Joseph's  genealogy.  2.  Mth.  that  of 
Joseph  and  Lk.  Mary's.  (1)  current  before  Reformation, 
and  now  supported  by  many  of  the  best  critics,  viz.  Alford, 
Meyer,  &c.  (2)  held  by'  Wieseler,  Ebrard,  Greswell, 
Alexander,  &c.  If  both  of  Joseph,  why  different?  Ans: 
One  through  kings  the  other  from  father  to  son.  How 
same  names  in  two  different  lines,  e.  g.  Salathiel  and 
Zorobabel  ?  Ans:  1.  Two  persons  with  same  name. 
2.  A  mere  coincidence.  Lines  together  in  Salathiel,  as 
direct  line  runs  out  and,  Sal.  nearest  heir.  This  explains 
how  Jechonias  is  Salathiel's  father,  while  Lk.  makes 
Salathiel  son  of  Neri.  Main  obj  :  If  both  Joseph's, 
they  only  establish  X's  legal  right  to  the  throne,  but  no 
personal  descent.  Ans  :  Some  sa}'  this  was  all  that  was 
required.  But  prophecy  does  not  allow  this  as  it  is  too 
definite.     Compare  2  Sam.  2  :  12  and  Acts  2  :  20  ;   13  :  23. 

Hijpotheds  of  Jos.  and  3Iari/.  First  cousins  relieves  the 
objection.  Grandfather  of  both  one  and  the  same  per- 
son :  Matthat  and  Matthan.  .Matthan  had  two  sons. 
Heli  and  Jacob.     Hence  Jos.  and  Marv  were  first-cousins — 


46 

of  Davidic  origin.  M.  had  sisters,  but  no  mention  of 
brothers.  Tradition  says  M.  was  a  ward  of  Jos.  Thus 
a  partial  relief  afforded  if  genealogies  be  of  Jos.  They 
give  X's  right  to  the  throne  personally  and  officially.  Ob- 
jections against  Lie's  giving  Mary's  :  1.  Female  line  not 
recorded."  Ans  :  This  not  female,  but  genealogy  of 
woman  through  her  father,  and  thus  the  male  line  of  M's 
ancestry.  2.  "M.  and  Eliz.  were  cousins,  and  Eliz.  of 
unroyal  line,  hence  M.  not  of  royal  line,  Ans  :  This 
could  be  on  mother's  side.  Intermarriage  allowed  among 
the  tribes.  3.  M's  name  not  mentioned  in  Lk's  genealogy, 
but  purports  that  of  Jos.  Ans:  This  not  easily  over- 
come, yet  not  absolutely  fatal  to  the  theory,  as  Lk.  says, 
"  who  was  supposed  to  be  the  son  of,"  &c.  4.  No  other 
proof  that  M.  was  from  David.  Ans:  Untrue — proved 
outside  of  genealogies  that  Christ  was  of  royal  line,  which 
confirms  the  probability  that  list  was  M's.  Lk.  1  :  31-32. 
This  prior  to  marriage  and  thus  necessary  that  the  child 
should  have  a  volantari/  father.  This  the  light  in  which 
she  could  understand  her  union  with  Jos.  if  she  were  of 
the  house  of  David.  Lk.  1  :  27.  David  may  refer  to  the 
principal  subject,  as  well  as  to  the  nearest  antecedent, 
i.  e.  Jos.  M.  went  to  Bm.  to  enrol  her  name  the  same 
as  Jos.  Lk.  2:  4.  So  tar  then  as  she  was  not  from 
Levitic  genealogy,  proofs  contrary.  All  texts  which 
prove  Christ  to  be  from  David  also  prove  the  same  for  M. 

This  subject  is  beset  with  difficulties.  Slight  mistakes 
destroy  certainty.  Genealogical  principles  unknown  to 
us.  Much  has  been  cleared  up  which  critics  deemed 
insurmountable,  and  hence  reasonable  to  suppose  that 
coming  researches  will  remove  all  difficulties.  (See 
Smith's  Diet.,  Arthur  Harvey,  and  Dr.  Green  on  Colenso.) 

§14.  Histon/  of  John  the  Baptist.  Mth.  3:  1-13;  Mk. 
1:  1-8;  Lk.'S:  1-18.  Ministry  of  John  and  Tempt, 
introduced  Christ's  public  v/ork.  Lk.  begins  by  formal 
transition  of  six  dates.  Mth.  and  Mk.  begin  with  preach- 
ing of  the  Baptist.  Prophecy  groui)s  the  Ba|)tism  and 
entrance  upon  public  work.  Predictions  of  Alalachi  are 
now  fulfilled.  John  began  to  [)reach  in  749.  a  Sabbatical 
year  by  best  chronology,  which  relieved  the  people  from 
labor  and  thus  afforded  them  leisure  to  attend  John's 
ministry.     "  The  word  of  the  Lord  came  to  John  in  the 


47 

wilderness,"  given  to  commence  work  directly,  and  hence 
he  was  inspired  and  divinely  guided.  Rationalists  say 
this  was  useless,  that  John  had  a  conviction  that  he  was 
a  man  of  God,  and,  seeing  the  condition  of  the  people, 
undertook  the  work  of  reformation.  But  the  scriptures 
show  he  was  under  divine  guidance. 

Desifpi  of  John's  Miiil^tr)/. — 1.  Preparation  for  Christ. 
John  represented  O.  T.  economy,  and  was  the  last  and 
greatest  of  O.  T.  prophets,  heing  an  embodiment  of  its 
spirit.  Hence  first  design  was  to  announce  I^ew  Dispen- 
sation. Popular  belief  in  external  kingdom,  which  John 
proposed  to  remove.  2.  Preparation  of  people  by  repen- 
tance. O.  T.  economy  educated  religious  life  without 
satisfying  it  and  the  people  to  e.x'pect  the  Messiah.  But 
the  majority  of  the  people  had  lost  the  spiritual  import 
of  prophetic  teaching.  The  Sadducees  were  sceptical 
and  Pharisees  self-righteous.  The  earnest  Essenes  had 
become  fanatics.  Hence  the  necessity  of  repentance  to 
restore  the  spiritual,  so  that  Christ  might  come  in  con- 
tact with  O.  T.  religion  in  revived  life  and  power,  and 
not  an  eliete  religion.  3.  To  point  out  the  Messiah  in 
the  person  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  and  hand  over  to  Christ 
the  O.  T.  Dispensation.  "  This  was  He  of  whom,"  &c. 
4.  To  show  both  dispensations  united  in  Christ,  that  the 
old  yielded  to  him  and  withdrew. 

John  accomplished  his  designs,  first  by  preaching.  No 
new  doctrine,  but  a  return  to  the  power  and  spirit  of  the 
O.  T.  Its  character  was  severe,  denunciatory,  and  replete 
with  threatenings  of  wa-ath.  Abounded  in  O.  T.  figures. 
Points  out  specific  sins.  Calls  all  to  repentance,  but 
never  inculcates  asceticism,  yet  wants  them  to  observe 
the  purity  represented  by  it.  Points  to  Christ  as  the 
lamb  of  God,  advances  upon  Isaiah  by  pointing  to  the 
individual.  His  preaching  more  weighty  because  of  the 
purity  of  his  life.  Personally  fitted  to  revive  O.  T.  relig- 
ion, representing  the  formal  and  spiritual. 

Design  furtheV  shown  by  the  rite  of  baptism.  The 
people  were  wont  to  connect  the  spiritual  with  the  sym- 
bolical. Baptism  somethinsr  new,  not  associated  with  the 
law.  Its  significance  was  the  washing  away  of  their  sins, 
a  restoration  of  the  spiritual.  John  charged  with  having 
learned  his  baptism  from  the   form   of  receiving   prose- 


48 

lytes.  Ans  :  As  an  initiatory  rite  of  J  iidaism  it  did  not 
assume  form  until  after  the  destruction  of  the  temple. 
He  received  it  from  the  washinscs  of  the  O.  T. 

John's  rehitions  to  O.  T.  1.  By  birth,  beins^  of  priestly 
orio;!!!.  2.  By  his  fulfilment  of  Malachi's  prophecy,  3:1, 
anil  Isa.  40:  3.  3.  By  the  place  he  frequented,  viz.,  the 
Desert  of  Judea,  or,  as  Lk.  says,  "the  reo:ion  round  about 
Jordan,"  i.  e.  between  mountains,  lower  Jordan  and  the 
Dead  Sea.  Boundai-y  crossed  where  Israel  entered  Ca- 
naan. Symbolical  of  the  moral  and  reliirious  destitution 
of  the  i)eople.  So  regarded  in  O.  T.  ITence  John  lived 
unlike  his  master,  who  sought  men  at  their  own  homes. 
He  must  be  found  in  the  wilderness.  His  personal 
api)earance  was  peculiar.  Dress  made  of  the  cheapest 
and  coarsest  material,  and  had  camel's  hair  uhich  is  shed 
yearly.  But  this  raiment  was  not  official,  only  assumed 
by  Elijah  and  John  to  sj-mbolize  renouncement  of  ease 
and  lu.vury.  In  2  Kings  1  :  8  Elijidi  called  a  "  hairy 
man.''  Comp.  Zech.  13  :  4.  Hence  our  conclusion.  His 
food  was  locusts  and  wild  honey.  The  nearest  at  hand. 
All  these  things  were  fit  to  mark  liim  as  a  representative 
of  O,  T.  dispensation. 

Was  Jolm's  preaching  merely  negative  ?  Was  his 
repentance  a  saving  grace?  Did  bajitism  cleanse  or 
simply  symbolize?  Rationalists  affirm  that  repentance 
meant  renouncing  of  sin  outwardly.  Some  orthodox 
writers  say  no  vitality  in  John's  work.  Answer:  John 
taught  all  the  grace  and  power  of  0.  T.  Hence  real  re- 
pentance and  faith,  as  far  as  O.  T.  exhibited.  He  vindi- 
cated the  relation  between  O.  and  N.  T.  "  I  baptize 
with,"  &c.  Further  said  baptism  was  u  mere  external 
ceremony;  others  make  the  contrast  between  John  and 
Christ,  "  I  baptize  in  dependence  upon  him  who,"  &c. 
J5est :  No  allusion  to  Christian  baptism  as  an  ordinance. 
Eminent  authorities  hold  this  view.  Christian  baptism 
not  yet  cstablisiied.  Meaning  then,  "  I  baptize  ceremo- 
nially with  efficacy."  Propo'sed  to  the  people's  faith— 
"  He  shall  pour  out  the  Spirit."  Thus  the  distinction  is 
in  degree  and  not  in  kind..   "He  shall  ....  with  fire:" 

1.  Keference  to  judgment  fire.    Next  clause,  "chaff",  &c." 

2.  Purifying  fire.  Drs.  Alexander  and  Schaff.  Better: 
Holy  Ghost,  and  therefore  zeal. 


49 

The  popular  success  oT  John  was  immense.  Jerusalem 
emptied  itself  to  the  banks  of  the  Jordan.  Jndea,  Sama- 
ria and  Galilee  gathered  there.  Priests,  scribes,  lawyers 
and  soldiers,  all  conditions  thronged  to  hear  him.  Yet, 
success  not  enduring,  as  the  masses  only  received  him  , 
formally.  His  power  enhanced  by  his  peculiar  position, 
as  a  voice  from  the  desert.  Had  he  preached  in  Jerusa- 
lem it  is  said  he  would  have  been  powerless. 

§15.  The  Baptism  of  Jesus.  —  Matt.  3  :  13,  14  ;  Mk.  1  : 
9-11;  Lk.  3 :  21-23.  John  began  six  months  before. 
Christ  now  ready  to  be  brought  before  the  excited  crowd. 
It  was  the  design  of  Christ's  journey,  to  be  baptized. 
"  Tou  i^o-Tcod/juai,  "  which  denotes  purpose.  The  act 
anomalous,  that  the  less  should  bless  the  greater.  Matt, 
says  John  felt  this  and  tried  to  hinder  him.  Christ's 
words  peculiar:  suffer  now.  Two  things  iniplied  in  them  : 
1.  Something  was  to  be  allowed,  suffered,  although  unu- 
sual. 2.  Seemingly  temporary.  "Suffer  it  to  be  so  no^i'." 
It  is  TZfnzou,  seendy  -to  complete  the  law's  obligation, 
what  is  right  in  a  specific  sense  for  the  fulfillment  of 
re(lem|>tion.  The  refusal  of  John  shows  :  1.  John  knew 
and  believed  Jesus  to  be  the  Messiah.  2.  Was  subordi- 
nate, did  as  Christ  commanded  him.  John  baptized  on 
Christ's  authority.  What  was  the  design?  As  John's 
baptism  involved  confession  of  sin,  what  relation  did 
Christ's  bear  to  this?  1.  Strauss:  Confession  of  sin 
actual.  2.  Others,  it  implied  peccability,  and  hence 
Lange,  it  was  ceremonial  unclean ness.  Too  narrow  a 
view.  3.  Schenkel  says  it  means  sympath}-  with  othei's. 
4.  Ti'ue  view.  As  the  circumcision,  it  was  expressive  of 
his  assumption  of  his  people's  sins.  In  the  law's  view  he 
v;as  a  sinner,  and  therefore  exhibited  the  necessity  of  the 
washing  away  of  the  sins  assumed.  As  Messiah  he  was 
sin-bearer.  Objection  to  last  :  Jesus  confounded  with 
the  people  ;  they  made  confession,  and  might  infer  Christ 
did  likewise  for  his  own  sins.  Guarded  :  Lest  they  might 
think  so,  the  divine  and  John's  testimony  intervened. 
The  design  is  again  shown  as  manifesting  the  unity  of 
the  two  dispensations.  The  chief  representatives  of  each 
meet.  The  O.  T.  covenant  baptizes  the  N.  T.  covenant. 
Christ  publicly  gives  authority  to  the  work  of  John,  and 
John  confesses  Christ  to  be  superior  to  himself.  John 
decrea-ed,  Christ  increased. 


50 

Buptisni  served  to  iunnij;nrate  tlie  work  of  Christ.  Af- 
forded opportunity  to  God  to  reeoiiMiize  liis  Son.  This 
was  the  chief  import  of  t!)0  baptism — 'r^joo  [ia-Tcndv^ro^, 
the  genitive  absolute,  Lk.  3:  21.  Main  subjects  the  mi- 
raculous manifestations.  Divine  attestations  necessary 
to  the  Messiah's  coming.  Wiierefore  Christ's  arrival 
delayed  till  a  great  concourse  had  flocked  to  John. 

At  Baptism  Christ  was  anointed  for  his  work  by  the 
Spirit.  Not  only  formal,  but  full  of  vital  power.  The 
person  of  Christ  is  acted  upon.  Ilo'y  Gliost  the  agent 
in  making  him  a  fit  place  for  the  indwelling  of  the  Logos. 
John's  baptism  represented  cleansing  from  sin  wliich  is 
the  Spirit's  work.  In  the  case  of  Christ  tlie  gift  con- 
firmed by  a  sign  of  the  Spirit's  descent.  The  sign  and 
descent  go  together.  Lk.  says  "  Jesus  was  praying" — a 
religious  act,  a  real  communication  of  the  Spirit  to  Jesus. 
After  baptism  is  the  temptation,  the  trying  of  liis  gift. 
Conjecture:  Christ  now  for  the  first  time  realizes  his 
mission,  the  full  consciousness  of  his  sacrificial  character. 
Aus  :  It  is  not  given  to  penetrate  so  deeply  into  the  mind 
of  Christ.  Certain  :  lie  did  advance  in  knowledge  of  an 
important  spiritual  crisis.  Always  full  of  the  Spirit 
sufiiciently  for  his  purposes,  but  now  receives  it  immea- 
sural)ry  for  bis  public  ministry.  Had  it  before  in  kind, 
not  in  degree,  as  now  he  is  the  organ  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

As  a  dove.  1.  Motion  of  the  dove — gliding.  2. 
Quickness.  3.  Softness  of  the  dove.  But  t'hese  are  in- 
consistent with  what  Lk.  says,  aoj/.tarixio  ec'dsi ;  hence  an 
appearance,  a  bodily  shape,  real  dove  shape,  if  language 
means  anything.  Why  dove  ?  1.  Reference  to  O.  T. 
after  the  deluge.  2.  Brooding,  symbolical  of  new  crea- 
tion. 3.  Purity.  4.  Symbol  of  sacrifice,  ceremonial 
associations.  (3)  and  (4)  combined  the  best.  Represented 
the  whole  spirit  of  his  ministry.  1.  The  salvation  he 
preached  was  peaceful,  pure  and  lovely.  2.  A  sacrificial 
work.  3.  Productive  agency  of  Spirit  at  creation — 
brooding  dove.  Ditficulty  :  Alth.  3  :  16— "  the  lieavens 
were  opened  aurcj)— to  hini ;"  Mk.  1  :  10 — '  He  saw  tlie 
heavens,  &c.;"  John  1: '32— "I  saw,"  i.e.,  John  Bap. 
Hence  the  Baptist  must  have  seen  the  Spirit  himself. 
Ans  :  1.  This  was  the  sign  by  which  he  could  recognize 
Christ.     Van  Oosterzee  considers  the  event  as  private, 


51 

and  Spirit  seen  only  by  Jolin  and  Christ.  01>j  :  a.  Nat. 
inter,  deny  the  objective  reality  of  the  phenomena.  The 
vision  became  so  only  in  the  spiritual  world,  and  for  the 
spiritualized,  h.  Discrepancy  in  the  several  accounts. 
Mth.  and  Mk.  say  "  Jesus  saw  ;"  John — Baptist  "  saw;" 
while  Lk.  is  sjeneral — "  heaven  opened  and  Spirit  de- 
scended." 2.  Dramatic  representations,  in  the  reconcilia- 
tion between  O.  and  X.  T.  Voice  from  heaven  not  con- 
lined  to  John  and  Jesus  alone.  "  My  beloved  Son  " 
founded  on  2  Sam.  7:  12.  But  the  expression  does  not 
imply  that  he  became  Son  at  baptism,  because  of  his 
eternal  relationship.  Ps.  2  :  25,  42  and  "  In  whom  I  am 
pleased"  from  Is.  42.  Lauije  says  aorist,  denoting  an 
eternal  act;  Alexander— a  definite  act.     The  last  best. 

In  this  expression  we  have  another  attestation  to 
Christ's  Messiahship.  Thisis  the  revelation  of  the  Trinity 
in  their  personal  agency  in  redemption.  The  first  in 
conception.  The  Father  at  baptism  declares  the  Son's 
Messiahsliip  and  the  Spirit  gives  grace  for  the  office. 
Minor  differences  in  form  of  expressions  made  a  subject 
of  cavil.  Mth:  "This  is  my,  &c."  whilst  Mk.  and  Lk. 
"  Thou  art,  &c."  Some  think  both  are  proper  and  that 
there  were  two  utterances  from  heaven.  Words  were 
doubtless  in  Hebrew  or  Aramaic  and  here  in  an  inspired 
translation. 

Objections: — 1.  Shortness  of  time.  If  John  began  six 
montlis  before  there  w^as  not  time  enougli  for  his  success 
and  influence.  Ans  :  John's  work  not  independent  but 
an  appendage  to  Christ's.  Results  accounted  for  by  the 
condition  and  great  state  of  expectancy  of  the  Jews. 
Strauss  makes  John  to  have  begun  when  about  20  years 
old,  long  before  Christ  came  to  liim.  2.  Inconsistency 
between  John  and  Syn.  Syn.  say  John  knew  Jesus  whilst 
John  says  tiie  Baptist  did  not  know  him.  Again  John 
represents  the  Bap.  as  recognizing  Christ  as  the  Messiah 
from  the  first,  whereas  Syn.  affirm  that  he  sent  a  deputa- 
tion to  Jesus  from  prison,  saying  "  Art  thou  he  that 
should  come?"  Strauss  says  John's  gospel  belongs  to  a 
later  period,  that  John  would  not  have  said  the  "Lamb 
of  God"  as  yet  because  he  did  not  know  him  as  the  suf- 
fering Messiah.  Had  he  understood  him,  he  would  have 
baptized  him  and  given  up  his  work.     Ans:  In  baptiz- 


52 

iiii^,  John  obeyed.  Strauss  attain  :  If  the  miraculous 
conception  were  true,  Christ  had  no  need  of  the  Spirit  at 
this  time,  and  lience  tlie  event  is  a  myth.  Aorain  :  John 
an  Essene,  and  he  baptized  and  lived  as  the  Essenes  did. 
This  o:ives  a  historical  root  of  Cliristianity.  John  Bap- 
tist and  Essenisi;:  are  the  germs  of  Christianity.  John 
saw  the  necessity  of  a  moral  reformation,  and  if  the  peo- 
ple could  be  aroused,  the  Messiah  would  appear,  and 
hence  he  proclaimed  time  for  repentance  had  arrived. 
But  John  according  to  Strauss  never  acknovvleged  Jesus 
as  Messiah.  Later,  Christ  is  baptized  and  indoctrinated 
into  Messianic  ideas.  Jesus  possessed  a  freer  and  clearer 
nature  than  John,  and  felt  a  lack  in  John's  negative 
method.  Hence  he  realized  all  tho-^e  graces  of  his  nature 
whicli  resulted  from  his  communion  with  God,  and  which 
were  unattainable  by  ascetic  methods.  They  looked  upon 
each  other  as  other  teacliers  did.  Strauss  has  three 
mytiiical  stages  of  growth  :  1.  Church  idea  of  the  dignity 
of  Jesus  required  that  John  should  acknowledge  his 
Messiahship.  2.  Lk.'s  story  of  his  childhood.  3.  John's 
account  of  a  clear  acknowledgment  of  Christ  by  the  Bap- 
tist from  the  first.  Strauss'  canon  :  That  account  which 
tends  to  exalt  the  person  of  Christ  is  the  mythical  one. 
This  rules  out  John's  narrative  altogether  of  the  Baptist's 
recognition  of  Christ  from  the  first.  Tl^e  remainder  of 
John's  gospel  is  assumed. 

The  residuum  :  l.,The  relation  of  John  to  the  Essenes, 
v,-ho  were  entirely  different.  Essenes  were  dualistic. 
Enjoined  asceticism  upon  all,  John  on  himself.  2.  The 
ascetic  washings  were  not  baptisms  but  oft  repeated. 
John's  once  for  all.  3.  Strauss:  John  founded  a  sect. 
Ans  :  ITntrue,  but  called  the  whole  nation  to  repentance. 
Asceticism  taught  i)urity  consisted  in  mortification,  but 
receivers  of  John's  baptism  did  not  l)elong  to  any  such 
school.  4.  It  involves  a  long  continuation  of  Christ 
with  John  which  is  inadmissible.  Renan  :  Christ  more 
independent  than  John.  Before  Christ  came,  John  had 
formed  a  full  idea  of  reformation.  Likewise  Christ  had 
deferred  doing  good  until  he  had  seen  John  and  improved 
on  him.  Schenkel  says  Christ  and  John  were  antagon- 
istic. Christ  at  first  sympathized  with  John,  but  after- 
wards regarded  his  influence  injurious.    Baptism  of  Christ 


63 

only  a  transaction  in  his  soul,  which  he  conceived  to  bo  his 
divine  mission,  and  hence  separated  tVoni  John.  Keim 
holds  it  was  purely  humanitarian.  Relates  with  rever- 
ence. Christ  merely  a  man.  Outward  signs  unreal,  but 
baptism  a  consecration  to  a  work  which  John  had  begun. 

§16.  The  Temptation. — This  is  a  great  mystery,  as  it 
involves  the  doctrine  of  his  person.  Follows  baptism. 
Hengstenberg  holds  th;it  there  is  not  room  enough  in  40 
days  tor  Bap.  and  Tempt. 

Designs  :  1.  Typical.  The  heads  of  the  Messianic  and 
evil  kingdoms  brought  face  to  face.  Jesus,  full  of  the 
Spirit,  is  subjected  to  a  trial  of  strength  with  Satan,  and 
triumphs  in  the  complete  overthi'ow  of  his  adversary. 
Tempt,  recalls  the  history  of  redemption,  tiiat  of  a  conflict 
between  the  kingdoms  of  light  and  darkness.  "Seed  of 
the  woman"  in  O.  T.  now  fulfilled.  Christ  overcomes 
for  his  people,  therefore,  in  connection  with  baptism  and 
before  his  life  work.  2.  Had  Messianic  designs,  {a)  It 
formed  a  part  of  Christ's  humiliation.  (6)  All  the  temp- 
tations prof)Osed  false  views  of  the  Messianic  work. 
What  could  be  accomplished  only  through  suffering, 
Christ  is  urged  lo  do  at  once  by  unlawful  means.  8. 
Personal  reference  to  his  own  inward  experience.  Spends 
forty  days  in  prayer  and  lasting,  and  thus  by  outward 
means  he  was  prepared  for  liis  work.  4.  Exemplary.  It 
shows  us  how  to  triumph,  by  prayer,  fasting  and  the  Holy 
Scriptures.  Christ's  practical  sermon  on  "  Resist  the 
devil  and  he  will  flee  from  you."  A  complete  circle  of 
temptations,  addressed  to  his  whole  nature,  so  that  he 
was  tempted  "  in  all  points  like  as  we." 

"  Led  by  the  Spirit."  1.  His  own  mind.  2.  The 
devil.  3.  The  Holy  Spirit.  Probably  the  last  who  led 
him  to  conquest  over  Satan  in  the  wilderness.  The  desert 
was  the  Quarantania  mountain  near  Jericho.  '•  With 
wild  heasts"  indicates  a  contrast  with  Adam's  situation. 
"  Forty  days  fasting"  has  O.  T.  associations.  Obj  :  Im- 
possible— too  longatime.  Ans  :  1.  Supernatural  power. 
2.  Power  of  spirit  over  body  exalted  to  an  eminent  degree 
in  Christ.  3.  Abstinence  only  from  ordinary  nourish- 
ments. Lk,  4:2:  oux  lipaytv.,  thus  making  his  abstinence 
total.  Typical  import  in  the  number  forty.  Moses  in- 
terceded for  his  people   forty  days ;  punishment  consist- 


54 

ed  of  forty  strikes;  Niiievitesfiisted  forty  days,  Ezekiel's 
piii-beariiig  forty  days,  and  purification  same  Ieiio;th. 
IlciR-e  connected  with  confession  of  sin.  Mth.  and  Lk. 
differ.  One  puts  tempt,  at  the  end  of  forty  days,  the 
other  says  he  was  tempted  ail  tlie  time.  Most  natural 
exphmation  that  he  was  tempted  in  thought. 

Character  of  the  Temptations.  I.  "If  thou  be  the  Son 
of  God"  refers  to  God's  words  at  baptism.  Satan  wants 
proof.  "  Command  these  stones,  &c."  Stones  numer- 
ous, a.  Tempt,  to  ghittony.  Improbable,  because  to 
eat  bread  after  forty  days  fasting  would  not  be  glutton}-. 
b.  Tempt,  to  distrust  Providence,  and  escape  suffering 
insei)arable  from  the  character  and  mission  which  he  as- 
sumed. Not  exclusively  app]ical)le  to  Christ.  His  suf- 
ferings were  representative.  Jews  looked  for  the  Mes- 
siah as  an  embodiment  of  plenty  to  supply  their  wants. 
(See  feeding  of  5000.)  Wliereibre  Chi"ist  was  tempted 
to  do  b}'  one  stroke  what  was  to  result  from  his  death 
and  universal  law  of  love  among  men.  Ans  :  Deut.  8  :  3. 
Misinterpreted  as  referring  to  truth.  ISTo  reference  to 
truth  but  to  manna,  as  truth  can  not  feed  the  body.  Idea  : 
Man  must  look  to  God  to  supply  all  his  wants,  not 
primarily  either  to  ordinary  or  extraordinary  means. 

II.  Directly  opposed  to  the  first.  A  presumptuous  dis- 
trust in  God.  As  if  Satan  said,  '"If  God  is  to  support 
you,  try  him."  Imitates  Christ  by  quoting  Ps.  91  :  11- 
12.  TTTspuyiou  zoo  isooi).  a.  Roof  of  Solomon's  porch. 
h.  Royal  porch,  c.  Double  pitch  of  roof  like  wings,  d. 
Wing,  as  we  use  it.  He  is  urged  to  forego  suffering. 
x\gain  Christ  takes  suffering  as  the  appointed  means  to 
fulfill  his  mission.  He  quotes  Deut.  6:  16.  Double 
meaning.  (1.)  Thou  shouldst  not  tempt  me  who  am 
your  sovereign.     (2.)  T  should  tempt  God  by  so  doing. 

III.  "  All  kingdoms."  Xot  Palestine.  Did  Satan  ()wn 
the  world?  Then  he  had  a  right  to  give.  Called  and  is 
the  prince  of  this  world.  TlTe  world  and  Messiah  antag- 
«mistic.  Not  Christ's  kingdoms  now,  though  they  are 
one  day  to  be  Christ's.  Falseness  of  his  claim  lay  in 
regarding  his  power  as  superior  to  Christ's,  whereas"^  all 
his  power  is  allowed  h'un  for  the  good  of  the  church.  The 
supreme  sin  in  the  temptation  is  the  worshipping  of  Satan. 
(Question  whether  (a)  civil  homage  due, a  sovereign  ov  {h) 


55 

reliijions  worship  is  doinaiuled  here.  The  two  are  insep- 
arable. To  acknowledge  Satan  would  be  to  receive  from 
him.  Tompt.  was  to  seculariry  and  idolatr}'.  Jews  es- 
pecially exposed  to  this,  adapting  themselves  to  surround- 
ing nations  by  adopting  their  idols.  Satan  proposed  to 
give  the  Icingdoms  of  the  world  immediately.  This  was 
just  the  object  of  Christ's  coming,  i.e.,  to  establish  Mes- 
sianic sway  over  the  whole  eartli.  The  people  ex[)ected 
this,  but  Christ  chose  the  spii'itual  and  suffering  instead 
of  the  temporal.  The  humiliation  andsuii'eringare  seen  to 
be  his  choice  rather  than  his  accepting  the  proffer  of  Satan. 
From  Deut.  6:  13,  "  Thou  shalt  &c."  Signal  honor  put 
on  Deut.  (Especially  assailed  by  late  critics.)  Thrice 
quoted  by  Christ  under  the  usual  form  :  ytyudrTTac. 

Remarks  :  The  three  tempTations  were  a  summary  of 
his  life  sufferings.  His  trium[)h  a  token  of  final  triumph. 
Three  tilings.  1.  Rebellion  vs.  Cod.  2.  Denial  of 
Christ's  supreme  Divinity.  3.  Subjection  of  the  same  to 
Satan.  Not  vulgar  seductions  of  sense,  but  are  addressed 
to  an  enlightened,  lofty  nature.  Hence  they  are  the 
highest  conceivable  forms  of  sin.  Addressed  to  the 
whole  nature,  corresponding  to  the  different  periods  of 
life,  the  sensual  (childhood),  intellectual  (youth),  and 
imaginative  (manhood).  The  three  temptations  are 
therefore  comprehensive.  As  to  their  order,  Mth.  and 
Lk.  differ,  hence  the  Rationalistic  cavils.  Mth.'s  order 
is  preferred.  1.  Because  it  exhil)its  the  contrast  between 
the  first  two.  2.  Lk.'s  •'  get  thee  behind  me  Satan"  more 
fitting  for  the  closing  scene.  Not  easily  ascertained  what 
determines  Lk.'s  order. 

When  Temptations  ended  "  the  devil  departed  from 
him."  "-'///''  -/ainoii,  tilla  fixed  season,  i.  e.,  to  be  renewed 
at  times.  Some  refer  it  to  Gethsemane,  but  properly  his 
whole  life  was  a  temptation.  Following  the  departure 
of  the  devil  "angels  ministered  unto  him,"  Jerf/.ovoov  is 
serving  food,  and  hence  appropriate. 

Nature  of  the  Temptation.  How  was  Chi'ist  approached  ? 
Owing  to  difficulties,  sound,  sober  critics  have  taken 
refuge  in  the  symbolical  rather  than  the  literal,  e.  g., 
Pressense  and  Lange.  Doubtless  it  was  something  akin 
to  humanity  because  of  the  "  worshipping  him." 
Grounds:       1.     Bodily    appearance    of    Satan     without 


56 

analogy  in  scripture.  Ans :  S.  can  assume  the  form  of 
an  "iiiigel  of  liglit"  if  he  wishes.  2  Cor.  11:  14.  Why 
not  that  of  man  ?  2.  Unimaginable  that  S.  could  trans- 
port Clirist  through  the  air,  &c.  Ans:  These  cavilers 
admit  S.  has  power  over  the  soul  which  is  far  greater, 
then  why  not  over  the  body  ?  Dr.  Alexnnder  :  No  com- 
pulsion. Verb  means  "  they  went  together,"  and  thus  a 
part  of  Christ's  humiliation  in  allowing  himself  to  be 
tempted.  3.  If  Christ  did  not  know  S.  he  was  not  omnis- 
cient, if  he  did  he  would  not  have  conversed  with  him. 
4.  He  could  not  see  the  world's  kingdoms  at  once  with- 
out a  miracle  and  if  he  did  Satan  performed  a  miracle. 
Ans:  Who  knows  Satan's  power — how  much  divine 
power  God  had  given  him  ?  JsixvOaiuis.  "  causes  to  see." 
Man}'  believe  S.  caused  all  this  to  pass  before  the  mind's 
eye.  If  this  is  so  say  some  critics  this  surrenders  the 
literal  inter'n.  Not  so.  It  is  deciding  whether  the  literal 
or  metaphorical  should  be  applied  to  the  passage.  5. 
Strauss  :  Satan  too  cunning  to  make  such  a  proposal. 
Again  :  If  Christ  could  be  tempted  he  was  not  sinless, 
if  so,  no  temptation.  (Lange  and  Pressense  :  Christ  had 
but  one  essence  and  that  divine.)  If  it  be  necessary  to 
suppose  that  Christ  could  sin  in  order  to  be  tempted, 
then  the  divine  essence  could  have  sinned.  Ques.  of  mid- 
dle ages  since  Augustine  :  Can  we  conceive  of  Christ 
as  peccable?  Now,  we  must  hold  two  things.  1.  Christ's 
tempt,  not  merely  an  external  act.  His  struggles  tierce 
and  internal.  They  shook  hisvery  soul.  "  In  all  points.'" 
2.  "  Yet  without  sin."     Wherefore  he  was  sinless. 

Diverse  views  of  the  occurrences.  1.  Strauss  de- 
clares it  to  be  a  myth.  Meyer  says  there  was  a  cuniiict  be- 
tween the  kingdoms  of  light  and  darkness.  2.  Schleier- 
macher :  A  parable  given  by  Christ,  and  mistaken  by  his 
disciples.  Intended  to  teach  tliem  how  to  escape  temp- 
tation. 3.  Nat:  External  occurrence  uttered  in  symbol- 
ical language.  Lange.  4.  An  ecstatic  state  of  mind 
brought  about  by  fas'ting.  Origen  and  Cyprian,  with 
Olshausen  in  modern  times.  5.  Simply  a  conflict  in 
Christ's  mind  produced  by  imagination.  Therefore 
Christ  was  necessarily  sinful.  Literature  on  this  is 
immense.      V^de  Trench's  Studies  on  the  Gospels. 


57 

I'UBLTC  MINISTRY. 

Early  Judean  Ministry, 

PrcUrnwari/ :  SyiioptistsundJolm  now  differ.  I.  As  to 
limits  of  tlie  period,  Syns.  speak  of  Christ  as  leaving 
Jndea  for  Gal.  imniediateh-  after  the  Temptation  and 
tljere  teaching.  Thej  mention  no  public  work  in  Jndea, 
previous  to  Ilis  o:oing  t(^  Jerusalem,  toward  the  close  of 
His  ministry.  John  (chs.  1-4)  supplements  theiraccount, 
mentioning  a  brief  visit  to  Galilee,  then  a  going  to  Jeru- 
salem to  His  first  Passover,  aud  a  subsequent  tarrying 
and  baptizing  in  Judea.  Hence,  John  chs,  1-4,  may  be 
tei'nied  History  of  Early  Judean  Ministry. 

II.  They  differ  as  to  Christ's  teaching,  its  nature  and 
manner. 

1.  According  to  Syn.  substance  of  Christ's  teaching  is 
"  kingdom  of  God,"  its  nature,  design,  conditions  of 
memliership.  (Sermon  on  Mt.,  Parables,  etc)  In  John 
tlie  i»hrase  occurs  in  but  two  chs.  (3:  3-5,  18  :   36). 

2.  Syn.  Christ  silent  as  to  Messianic  claims,  suppresses 
popular  Messianic  enthusiasm  and  refuses  Messianic 
titles.  In  John  His  Divine  Person  is  the  main  thetne. 
(Nicodernns.  Woman  of  Samar.) 

3.  Syn.  say  little  of  His  sacrificial  death.  In  John  it 
is  predicted  from  the  first.     (Vide.  1  :  29,  2  :  li>-22,  3  :  14. 

4.  In  Syn.  Christ  teaches  universality  of  gospel  only 
toward  close  of  His  life.  John  records  it  among  His 
earliest  utterances.     (Vide.  4  :  21-23). 

Sceptics,  exaggerating  these  difficulties,  reject  John, 
begin  with  Gal.  Ministry,  and  adopting  Syn.  account, 
allege  : 

1.  At  first  Christ  had  n'o  consciousness  of  Messiahship, 
but  was  driven  to  assume  Messianic  character  to  accom- 
plish His  plans. 

2.  Doctrine  of  a  sacrificial  mission  grew  up  in  His 
mind  oradnally.  Strauss  says  both  these  ideas  conceiv- 
ed late  in  life  while  in  Csesarea  Philippi,  when  He  saw 
deatli  was  inevitable. 

3.  Idea  of  a  universal  gospel  did  not  originate  until 
after  His  rejection  by  the  Jewish  nation. 

To  reconcile  tliese"^ differences  is  the  great  problem  of 
gospel    harmony.     This   may  be  done   by   showing  1st. 


58 

That  there  is  no  inconsistency  in  the  accounts,  or  2.  That 
their  conihination  yields  liistoric  unity.  (1.)  These  ac- 
counts involve  one  another  and  are  parts  of  one  whole. 
The  idea  of  king  and  kingdom  are  supplemental.  (2.) 
Syn's  teaching  as  to  Person  of  Christ  is  not  so  meagre  as 
sceptics  claim.  Messianic  titles  are  suppressed,  be- 
cause of  false  Messianic  notions.  From  the  outset 
authority  is  claimed  which  is  irrational  unless  divine. 

Thecritical  view requiresthe rejection  notof  John  alone, 
but  also  of  a  great  portion  of  the  Syn's  account.  (Bap- 
tism, Temptation,  Synag.  at  Nazaretli,  Sermon  on  Mt., 
Parables.) 

(3.)  In  John,  Christ  does  teach  "  the  kins-dom."  (To 
Nicodemus  3:  3-5.  Before  Pilate  18 :  36.)  In  Syn. 
there  are  passages  teaching  divinity  (Matt.  11  :  25-30.) 

(4.)  A  progress  is  marked  in  the  self-revelation  of  Christ 
in  Jno.  as  well  as  in  Syn.  In  public  it  is  enigmatical; 
direct  declarations  are  private.  (Cleansing  temple.  Dis- 
course with  J^icodemus  and  Samaritan  woman.) 

Historical  reason  for  this  ditference  :  Christ  owed  a 
duty  to  the  Jews  as  a  nation,  first.  They  could  not  be 
rejected  until  they  had  rejected  Him.  Jno's  plan  is  to 
record  instances  of  Christ's  declaration  of  Messiahship 
in  Jerusalem,  When  rejected  there.  He  goes  to  Galilee, 
prepares  for  the  founding  of  a  church,  with  its  otKcers 
and  government,  as  is  related  by  the  Syn. 

Jno.  1-4  :  45  in  the  harmony  are  inserted  between 
Matt.  4:  11  and  12  (Vide  Scheme.)  To  justify  such 
insertion,  it  must  be  shown  : 

1.  No  real  contradiction  exists  between  the  two  ac- 
counts. 2.  Tlie  portion  omitted  was  not  in  the  plan  of 
the  individnal  writer.  3.  Combination  furnishes  a  con- 
sistent view.  4.  Many  undesigned  coincidences  evince 
that  the  accounts  presuppose  one  another. 

Reasons  for  insertion  lure  : 

1.  Mt.  and  Mk.  indicate  space  between  Temptation  and 
Galilean  Ministry,  by  saying  that  Christ  went  to  Galilee 
because  of  the  inprisonment  of  Jno.  Bap. 

2.  These  four  chaps:  Jno.  record  interviews  between 
Jesus  and  Jno.  Bap.  They  must  have  occurred  before 
Jno.  was  imprisoned.  They  must  have  occurred  after 
the  Baptism— as  it  is   referred   to  as  past  (Jno.  1  :  32), 


and  if  later  than  tlie  B.'iptisni  they  must  he  snhseqnent 
to  the  Temptation,  as  nothing  intervened  hetween  these 
events  (Mi<.  1  :  12).  Fonr  chs.  of  Jno.  at  least  shonhl  be 
inserted  here  as  the  narrative  is  nn broken.  Some  har- 
monists insert  tive  — thns  changing  the  time  of  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Galilean  minit^try. 

Length  of  this  period  is  inferred  from  §25.  Jno.  4  : 
35.  Fonr  months  till  harvest.  Harvest  time  was  the 
middle  of  Nisan,  i.e.  beginning  of  April. 

Fonr  months  previous  brings  ns  to  December,  eight 
months  subsequent  to  the  first  Passcn-er  (ch.  3),  and  one 
year  after  the  Baptism.  Hence  duration  of  Judean 
ministi'v  is  estimated  as  one  year.  (So  Meyer,  Wieseier), 
The  e.\egesis  of  some  assigns  to  this  verse  merely  the 
weight  of  a  proverb — (1)  Gratuitous.  J^o  evidence  of 
such  proverb.  (2)  Foix*e  of  izc  forbids  (so  Meyer  vs. 
Aiiord  and  Gieseler).  These  minor  differences  do  not 
essentially  affect  the  events  of  the  period. 

Designs  of  the  events  of  this  period  : 

1.  Primanj  Offering  Himself  to  nation  as  the  true  Mes- 
siah— by,  a.  Testimony  of  Jno.  Bap.  b.  Cleansing  Tem- 
ple— sliowing  supreme  authority  in  House  of  God.  c. 
Miracles.     (/.  Teaching  siViritual  nature  of  His  kingdom. 

2.  Sceonddri/.  Preparation  for  Galilean  ministry,  in 
consequence  of  foreseen  rejection  by  Jewish  liierarchy — 
by,  a.  Brief  visit  to  Galilee.  6.  Choice  of  disciples  irre- 
spective of  existing  theocrac.v.  c.  Stay  in  Judea,  teach- 
ingand  baptizing  with  Jno.  Bap.,  until  his  imprisonment. 

Series  of  first  things  is  given  in  Jno.;  viz.  first  gather- 
ing of  disciples,  first  miracle,  first  Passover,  first  teach- 
iinif,  &c.     Jno.  records  a  week's  history  — day  by  day. 

'1st  day  1  :  19-28,  2d.  1:  29-34,  3d.  1:  35-42,  4th.  1: 
43-51,  and  2:  1,  r^  'JM''?-  '^fi  ^f'^'^J/->'^-  e.  the  third  day 
after  starting  on  His  journey,  making  seven  days  in  ali. 
Compare  Jno's  record  of  last  week  of  Christ's  life, 

§18.  Testimoni)  of  John  Bapt.  to  Jesus.  Such  testimony, 
naturally  to  be  expected  at  this  period,  historically  oc- 
curs. Sanhedrim  send  from  Jerus.  a  deputation  of  Priests 
and  Levites  to  inquire  into  tlie  meaning  of  John's  work. 
Their  arrival  at  the  Jordan  coincides  with  Christ's  return 
from  the  desert  of  the  temptatfon  (v.  27.)  (Others  how- 
ever place  Christ's  return  at  v.  29  on  the  day  following). 


60 

This  (Icpntntion  evinces  the  extensive  iinpression  i)ro- 
cliiced  by  John's  work.  The  mission  v/ns  authoritative, 
sent  out  by  the  highest  ecclesiastical  court  of  the  nation, 
whose  duty  it  was  to  investifjate  all  religions  movements. 
It  was  not  necessarily  liostile  at  iirst.  Had  they  fonnd 
John  easil>' influenced  and  a  courtier  (Lk.  7:  25),  they  would 
iiave  favored  his  views  and  used  him  as  an  insti'ument  in 
furthering  their  own  designs.  (Jolin5:  35);  but  having 
lieard  his  testimony  to  Chiisf,  they  charo-e  him  with 
"  having  a  devil."  (Lk.  7  :  33).  Their  questions  show 
acquaintance  with  tlie  prevailing  belief  that  the  Mes- 
siah was  at  hand,  and  exhibit  the  state  of  popular  Mes- 
sianic expectations.  Art  thou  the  Christ,  or  Elias  (Mai. 
4  :  5),  or  that  prophet.      (Deut.  18  :  15.) 

Does  not  John's  denial  that  he  is  Elias,  contradict 
Clirist's  express  statement.  Matt.  11  :  14  ?  Ans  :  John 
denies  he  is  Elias  in  person;  admits  he  is  in  spirit  by 
quoting  prophecies  referring  to  Elias,  as  referring  to 
himself  oflicially. 

Jews  of  that  day,  seem  to  have  made  a  false  distinc- 
tion based  on  Deut.  18:  15,  between  Christ  and  "  tluit 
prophet."     (John  4  :  19,  25,  6  :  14,  7  :  40,  41). 

To  these  questions,  John  returns  an  abrupt  "  No," 
wishing  to  keep  himself  in  the  background,  while  lie 
bi'ings  Jesus  forward.  He  defines  his  own  mission  and 
character,  by  simply  quoting  Is.  40:  3. 

Points  of  interest  are  1.  Extent   of  John's   influence. 

2.  Excited  Messianic  expectations  and  their    character. 

3.  Providential  care  that  rulers  should  be  brought  into 
contact  with  Christ,  and  receive  ample  proof  of  His 
claims,  from  the  very  first.  4.  Humility  of  John  Bap. 
Lange  notes  analogy  between  temp,  of  Christ  and  John, 
a  temptation  to  external  power. 

Place.  Text.  liocpt.  sv  lirji^a^noa,  (John  1  :  28),  criti- 
cal reading,  liqd^au:a.  Location,  now  unknown.  Prob- 
ably e.  of  Jordan  ;  a  ford  near  Jericho.  Renewed  testi- 
mony, (v.  29).  "Lamb  of  God."  One  of  the  most 
striking  passages  of  scripture.  It  embodies  the  great 
truths  of  both  Testaments  and  declares  the  fulfillment  of 
prophecy.  The  theme  of  the  O.  T.  is  one  to  come.  John 
says  '  Behold  Him,'  "  He  is  here." 


61 

Ilongstenberni;  confines  his  reference  to  the  Paschal 
Lainb,  iis  beinii;  tl)e  true  sin-oftV-rino-.  Bnt  John  nses 
"  Lamb''  as  rei'resontative  of  all  O.   T.   sacrificial  types. 

Reasons  for  selecting;  "Lamb"  as  a  title  of  Chi'ist  are, 
1.  Fnllills  Is.  53:  7.  "Lamb  to  the  slann^hter,"  which 
Jews  recognized  as  Messianic.  2.  Expresses  the  s[)irit 
of  Christ's  ministry.     (Comp.  Rev.  5:  6.) 

Some  critics  den}'  a  sacrilicial  reference,  others  oliject, 
1.  That  John  in  here  teaching  vicarions  deatli  of  Christ 
as  Son  of  God,  for  the  world,  displays  a  knowledge  of 
doctrines  not  then  current,  but  which  were  the  after 
development  of  advanced  theology. 

Ans.  a.  Objection  based  on  subversion  of  history. 
These  conceptions  of  Messiah's  work  were  fundamental  : 
they  had  died  out  of  the  popular  creed  and  John's  mission 
was  to  revive  them. 

b.  John  speaks  as  a  pro[)het  and  was  himself  surprised 
at  the  manner  in  which  his  prophecies  were  fulfilled. 
(Lk.  7:  20). 

2d  Oijjection,  Jolm  1  :  33  "  I  knew  him  not"  contra- 
dicts Mt.  3:  14,  wiiic'h  presupposes  knowledge  of  Jesus, 
both  as  man  and  Messiah. 

Ans.  a.  Distinction  between  knowiniz;  officially  and 
personally.  (Rob.  Gk.  Harm.  p.  187,  §18.  Note.)  John 
Bap.  was  aware  that  Jesus  of  Naz.  was  Messiah  of  proph- 
ecy. "But  he  knew  not  Jesus  personally"  before  His 
baptism,  when  the  spirit  descended  as  sign  upon  him. 
This  is  not  an  explanation.  If  he  did  not  know  him  per- 
sonally, why  refuse  to  baptize  him  (Mt.  3:  14).  To  ex- 
plain by  dignity  of  Christ's  personal  appearance  (Far- 
rar  I.  p.  114  seq.)  is  unsatisfactory. 

h.  Better  explanation,  oox  fjozcv  has  only  relative  force. 
John  Bap.'s  previous  knowledge  was  subjective,  now 
possessing  a  new  knowledge  based  on  testimony  from 
heaven,  he  makes  an  otticial  declaration.  (Comp.  relative 
use  of  terms  by  John  in  chs.  2:  11,  and  a  further  and  in- 
creased belief  based  on  testimony  of  miracles,  also  7:  5). 

§19.  Jesus  gains  disciples.  Had  the  writer  of  the  fourth 
gospel  been  an  impostor,  John  Bap.'s  testimony  would 
have  been  succeeded  by  the  abandonment  of  his  separate 
work,  his  following  Christ  as  a  disciple,  going  with  him 
to  Jerus.  and  testifying  to  His  Messiahship  before  the 


.      62 

Sanliedrim.  Multitudes  would  have  accepted  and  follow- 
ed Him.  On  the  contrary,  the  srospel  narrative  informs 
us  that  but  few  believe,  tliat  Jolm  Cap.  recognizing  the 
independency  of  his  own  ministry  keeps  aloof  from 
Christ  and  continues  bearing  testimony  to  Him  as  the 
Messiah. 

Desupi  of  Christ  in  gatherinc/ disciples.  1.  To  lead  people 
to  Him  gradually.  2.  lie  tlius  begins  to  lay  the  founda- 
tion of  that  church  which  was  to  continue  after  He  had 
been  taken  away,  an  action  based  on  foreknowledge  of 
His  death.  Although  submitting  Himself  to  the  people 
for  their  rejection,  He  acts  as  knowing  the  result. 

V.  35-37.  J^ext  day  at  tenth  hour  i.e.  4  P.  M.,  two  dis- 
ciplesof  John  follow  Jesus:  first  converts  :  their  address 
"  Rabbi"  the  first  recognition  of  Christ  as  a  teacher. 

Of  these  two,  one  was  Andrew,  the  other  is  argued  to 
have  been  Evangelist  John,  from,  1.  His  habitual  silence 
as  to  himself  2.  The  minuteness  of  the  details  proves 
the  narrator  to  have  been  an  eye  witness.  3.  Syn.  men- 
tion John  among  the  first  disciples. 

41  V.     Twofold  exegesis, — tzocotoq: 

1.  Andrew  and  Jolm  seek  each  his  own  brother:  An- 
drew finds  his  /?'r.9/.     (So  Meyer  and   Alexander). 

2.  Both  seek  Peter  :  Andrew  is  first  to  find  him. 

43  V.  The  next  day  Philip,  being  called,  brings  Nath. 
commonly  understood  to  be  Bartholomew — because  1. 
John  never  mentions  a  Bartholomew  nor  the  Synops.  a 
Nathaniel.  2.  Time  of  his  call,  while  journeying  through 
Gal.:  (Barthol.  resided  at  Cana  of 'Galilee).  "3.  When 
Christ  showed  Himself  to  His  disciples  after  resurrection 
at  sea  of  Tiberias,  Nath.  was  of  their  number.  (John 
21:  1,2.)  4.  Philip  brought  Nath. :  and  the  names  Philip 
and  Bartholomew  always  together  in  the  catalogues  of 
the  Twelve.  5.  Bartholomew  is  a  patronymic,  son  of 
Tolmai,  by  which  name  he  was  probably  better  known 
than  by  that  of  Nathaniel.  (Vide.  Farrar  I.  p.  152  and 
Note).     Thus  6  disciples  are  called  in  the  first  week. 

Objection  :  In  Mt.  16  :  18,  Peter's  change  of  name  is  con- 
nected with  l\is  confession,  thus  contradicting  John  1 :  42. 
Ans.  Name  Cephas  is  \\evQ  given  ;  in  Mt.  Ciirist  confirms 
and  (tp plies  it. 


68 

N'ote  the  character  of  those  called;  relio^ioiis-rQinded 
men  :  come  to  Jordan  to  hear  John  ;  meet  Christ ;  listen 
to  Bap.'s  testimony  concerning  Him,  and  are  convinced 
of  the  validity  of  His  claims. 

Rationalists  allege  that  Syn.  (Lk.  5  :  1-11)  represent 
disciples  as  following  Christ  becanse  of  miracles  He  per- 
formed. John  says  (1.  35-51)  they  were  impressed  by  His 
personal  inllnence.  These  acconnts  are  not  inconsistent. 
According  to  both,  Christ  furnishes  evidence  of  His 
Messiahsiiip.  Here  He  calls  Philip  with  authority,  shows 
divine  knowledge  in  reading  mind  of  Nath.,  claims  to  be 
the  connecting  link  between  heaven  and  earth.  (Comp. 
Gen.  28:  12.)" 

Note  the  only  recorded  words  of  Jesus  up  to  this  point. 
At  12  vears  of  age  to  His  mother,  Lk.  2  :  49.  To  John 
Bap.  Mt.  3:  15.  ^To  Satan,  Mt.  1:  1-11.  To  His  disci- 
ples, John  1:  39. 

§20.  John  2  :  1-12.  Marriage  at  Cana.  John  here 
emphasizes  the  fact  of  tlie  '■'•  heghinincj  of  miracles."  Ch. 
2  :  11.  Cana  of  Gal.  mentioned,  not  to  distinguish  the 
town  from  another  of  the  same  name,  but  to  show  that 
the  beginnings  of  Christ's  work  were  in  Gal. 

Why  in  Galilee,and  before  in  Jerusalem  ?  1.  Prediction 
(Is.  9  :1,  2,  quoted  Matt.  4  :  14)  that  Gal.  should  be  tirst 
to  receive  spiritual  light,  is  thus  fulfilled.  2.  John,  who 
confines  his  account  to  Christ's  Judean  work,  thus  shows 
his  knowledge  of  the  work  in   Galilee. 

Christ  went  to  Galilee  at  this  time,  both  as  a  prepara- 
tion for  the  coming  Gal.  ministry,  and  to  produce  a 
simultaneous  impression  in  different  parts  of  the  country 
by  his  appearance  in  various  places  within  a  short  time, 
giving  opportunity  for  judgment  upon  himself  and  work. 
This  visit  is  an  episode  in  Judean  Period,  pointing  for- 
ward to  the  next. 

Farrar  identifies  Cana  with  Kefr-Kenna.  (Vide  Vol. 
I.  Note,  p.  161.  Andrews,  p.  149.)  Robinson  prefers 
Kana  el  Jelil. 

That  the  marriage  was  among  Christ's  relatives  has 
been  inferred  from  Mary's  prominence  at  the  feast ;  as 
to  the  parties  themselves  conjecture  is  fruitless.  Joseph 
being  unmentioned,  it  may  be  assumed  he  was  now  dead. 
Jewish  marriage  feasts  usually  lasted  7  days  (Judg.  14: 
12).     Festivities  had  begun  when  Jesus  arrived. 


64 

Ohjectioim :  1.  How  did  Mary  know  lie  con!d  perform 
miracles,  if  this  was  first?  especially  as  the  occasion  did 
not  demand  it.  Wine  migiit  readily  be  purchased.  Ans  : 
Some,  he  wrought  miracles  in  private;  some,  she  looked 
to  him  naturally  for  aid;  others,  from  circumstances  of 
his  birth,  she  had  come  to  believe  in  his  divinity  ;  others, 
knowing  his  work  had  been  inaugurated  b\'  his  baptism, 
she  looked  for  a  speedy  fulfil ment  of  her  hopes. 

2.  How  reconcile  Clirist's  working  the  miracle  with 
his  statement,  "  M3'  hour  is  not  yet  come,"  v.  4.  Ann  : 
Mistaken  idea  in  her  mind  as  to  character  of  Messianic 
kingdom,  viz.,  time  of  material  plenty.  Clirist  shows 
thaHiuman  motives,  even  the  most  urgent,  were  not  to 
be  the  cause  of  the  manifestation  of  his  glory  as  Messiah. 
Com  p.  Lk.  2  :  49. 

'6.  Amount  of  wine  produced.  Each  firkin  or  hath 
CHeb.)  contained  from  7  to  9  gals.,  hence  each  jar  held 
about  I  of  a  barrel.  (Vide  Farrar,  Vol.  I.,  p.  166,  note 
2.)  Ans:  Some  argue  from  v.  8,  tliat  the  water  became 
wine,  as  drawn,  or  was  a  handsome  wedding  gift  for  a 
poor  household.  The  large  quantity  is  significant  of 
Christ's  giving  without  measure.  It  precludes  all  possi- 
bility of  collusion. 

De-vigns.  1.  To  manifest  his  glory.  2.  To  relieve 
want  and  embarrassment  of  host.  3.  Teaches  true  mo- 
rality ;  contrasts  John  the  ascetic  with  Christ,  who  did 
not  withdraw  from  the  world,  but  lived  above  it.  4. 
Enforces  the  sanctity  of  the  marriage  tie.  It  is  analogous 
to  feeding  the  multitudes;  but  here,  substance  is  changed, 
there  multi[»lied.  (On  tliis  miracle,  vide  Princeton  Re- 
view, July  and  October,  1865.) 

From  Cana,  Christ  goes  to  Capernaum  (emended  text, 
ere  h'acpaouaohfi),  probably  to  join  a  caravan  there  making 
up  for  the  feast.  From  Lk.  4:  23  it  has  been  inferred 
that  Christ  at  this  time  wrought  miracles  there.  It  is 
preferable  to  refer  this  allusion  to  healing  nobleman's 
son,  Jno.  4  :  46-54. 

§21.  John  2:13-25.  First  Passover.  Temple  Cleansed. 
Christ  finds  the  Temple  polluted  by  the  presence  of  cat- 
tle and  doves  for  sacrifice,  and  of  money  changers,  ex- 
changing foreign  coin.  Although  Christ  used  a  scourge, 
the  force  emi>loyed  was  moral  and  spiritual  rather  than 


65 

physical.  PdvTo.z  (v.  15)  refers  to  men  as  well  as  cattle. 
Some  infer  from  v.  16,  said,  etc.,  leniency  toward  (love- 
sellers.  Caj»tions  cavil.  Command  is  given,  because 
doves  could  not  be  scourged. 

V.  16,  "  make  not,"  etc.  Comp.  stronger  utterance 
Matt.  21  :  13, — quoted  from  Is.  56:  7, — employed  at  sec- 
ond cleansing  of  the  Temple.    V.  IT  quot.  from  Ps.  69:9. 

Significance  of  the  act:  1.  Teaches  lesson  in  repent- 
ance, and  need  of  reformation.  2.  Symbolic  expression 
of  Messianic  claims.  D(^clares  God  his  Father  (v,  16), 
assumes  supreme  authority  in  temple  (fuUilling  Mai.  3  : 
1-3),  refers  to  Temple  as  type  of  his  body  (v.  19),  God's 
permanent  indwelling,  typically  represented  in  the  Tem- 
ple, being  literal  in  his  life.  Christ  in  public  declares 
Messiahship  thus  enigmatically,  because,  1.  People  are 
not  ready  to  receive  him  ;  false  Messianic  notions  pre- 
vail;  more  explicit  statement  would  lead  to  popular  out- 
break. 2.  Bible  an  oriental  book.  Jews  an  Eastern 
nation.  To  them  an  enignnitic  act  needed  no  interpre- 
tation. That  the  Jews  understood  him  is  evident  from 
their  demanding  a  sign,  v.  18.  This  shows  they  were 
knowingly  rejecting  Christ,  altliough  possessing  evidence 
of  John  Bapt.,  of  prophets,  and  of  Christ's  miracles.  By 
sign  tliey  denoted  an  outward  manifestation  coinciding 
with  their  idea  of  Messiah.  Sign  given  v.  19,  afterwards 
called  sign  of  Jona,  contains  indisputable  reference  to 
his  resurrection  (v.  21).  This  is  onlj-  occasion  of  Christ's 
predicting  his  resurrection  on  third  day.  That  his  ene- 
mies understood  him  is  seen  from  their  allusion  to  it 
after  his  death.     (Matt.  27  :  63.) 

Criticcd  Objections.'  1.  Unhistoric  expectation  and  pre- 
diction of  his  death.  He  could  not  yet  foresee  this  issue  ; 
people  and  disciples  could  not  understand  him.  [Mean- 
der and  Olshausen,  denying  any  reference  to  resurrection, 
interpret,  '  Persist  and  destroy  tliis  national  temple,  and 
I  will  found  a  spiritual  church.'] 

Alls:  Not  necessary  for  Christ  to  limit  his  discourses 
by  what  others  could  understand.  True  exegesis  uses 
vabv,  V.  19,  in  typical,  not  double  sense. 

2.  Obj.  Boldness  of  act  would  enrage  the  Jews  and 
excite  opposition. 


66 

Ans  :  The  siuldemiess  and  justice  of  tlie  net  eomliined 
with  the  air  of  Christ's  personal  anthority  (Cp.  John  18  : 
6)  account  for  no  popuhir  distnrhanco. 

8.  Sjn.  record  a  siniihir  scene  in  Passion  Week;  could 
not  liave  occurred  twice,  lience  both  are  mythical. 

Ans  :  Why  not  twice  ?  Appropriate  at  beginning  and 
end  of  ministry.  A  iirst  and  last  oi)portunity  of  accept- 
ing him.  John,  who  above  records  the  early  Jndeau 
ministry,  mentions  the  cleansing  occurring  in  that  period, 
and  to  avoid  repetition  omits  the  second,  contained  in 
tlie  Syn.  Strauss  understands  cleansing  as  a  real  act, 
but  in  opposition  to  Judaism  and  the  entire  sacrificial 
system. 

V.  23  alludes  to  further  miracles.  None  recorded, 
John  introducing  miracles  only  forsake  of  the  connected 
discourses.  Verses  23,  25,  Effect.  "  Many  believed," 
with  evanescent  faith,  founded  only  upon  the  miracles. 
(Comp.  £7Ti(TT£U(Tau,  V.  23,  iKcazeuiv,  v.  24.  "  Many  trusted 
him.     He  did  not  trust  himself  to  them.") 

§22.  John  3  :  1-21.  Discourse  mith  Nicodemus.  Nico- 
demus,  member  of  Sanhedrim,  on  evidence  of  miracles 
believes  Christ  to  be  a  divinely  appointed  teacher.  He 
is  mentioned  (Comp.  7  :  50),  Tabernacles,  also  (ch.  19  :  39) 
burial.  "Coming  uy  night"  shows  odium  already  at- 
taching to  Christ.  Being  a  Pharisee  and  ruler,  his  visit 
shows  that  Clirist's  influence  was  not  confined  to  a  single 
class. 

Jesus  teaches,  1.  Nature,  necessity,  source  of  the  new 
birth.  2.  Spiritual  nature  of  kingdom  of  heaven.  3. 
In  order  to  regeneration  there  is  necessity  for  faith  in 
himself,  as  only  revealer  of  the  Father,  aiul  sacrifice  for 
sin.  Christ  declares  Ins  pre-existence ;  displays  fore- 
knowledge of  the  atonement. 

Perplexity  of  Nicodemus  evinces  total  loss  among  his 
class,  of  spiritual  meaning  of  O.  Test.  Christ's  rebuke 
(v.  10)  sliows  that  he  is  teaching  no  new  doctrine. 

Objcciiovs  to  genuineness  of  the  Discourse.  1.  These  doc- 
trines not  developed  until  later.  2.  Terms  and  ideas  are 
those  of  heretical  school  in  early  church,  especially  such 
phrases,  "  Christ  the  only  revealer  of  the  Father,"  "new 
birth,"  etc.  "■  Begeneration"  not  a  N.  T.  word.  Verbal 
form  occurs  16  times;  peculiar  to  John.  Only  allied 
form  in  N.  T.  is  naXq-yr^eaia,  Mt.  19:  28,  Tit.  3  :  5. 


67 

Strauss  rei2:iirds  whole  discourse  as  fiction,  bearino- 
impress  of  Pseudo  John's  mind.  Xieod.  an  ideal  cliarac- 
ter  introduced  as  ott'set  to  the  reproach  tliat  all  ti.rst  con- 
verts were  from  tlie  pooi'er  class. 

Bauer.  All  allegory  ;  Kicodemus  representing  unbe- 
lieving Judaism,  seeking  a  sign,  a  counterpart"  of  the 
woman  of  Samaria,  who  represents  believing  heathenism. 

Sceptical  Inferencefi.  These  doctrines,  peculiar  to  John's 
gospel,  are  those  of  Gnosticism.  Hence  the  fourth  gos- 
[)el  must  have  been  written  as  late  as  close  of  2nd  Cent, 
by  a  Gnostic,  probably  a  Valentinian. 

Ans.  1,  Terminology  alone  is  peculiar  to  John.  Both 
Testaments  teach  these  doctrines.  Comp.  O.  T.  expression 
Ps.  51:  10  "clean  heart:"  also  Paul's  phrase  '■'■y.natz'' 
Gal.  6  :  15.  2.  True  relation  of  Gnosticism  to  N.  T. 
doctrine,  a.  Sce|>tics  exaggerate  the  resemblance;  more 
difference  than  likeness,  b.  Gnosticism  a  heresy  arising 
within  the  churcli.  Its  ideas  and  terms  are  borrowed 
from  John.  c.  Alexandrian  philosophy  of  wliich  Gnos- 
ticism was  an  off-shoot  was  imbued  with  O.  T.  ideas. 
jS".  T.  was  the  development  of  these  ideas.  Hence  both 
drawing  from  a  common  source  employed  to  some  degree 
similar  modes  of  thonglit  and  expression,  d.  Christ 
dealt  with  the  philosophical  questions  of  His  time.  e. 
John,  writing  when  Gnostic  speculation  had  begun  to 
disturb  the  church,  like  Paul,  (Cp.  Eph.  and  Col.) 
writes  against  it,  using  its  nomenclature.  Christ's 
teachings  now  are  clearer  than  those  subsequently  given 
in  Galilee,  because,  1,  His  great  purpose  of  offering 
Himself  to  the  Jews  as  their  Messiah  necessitated  lucid 
statement  of  nature  and,  blessings  of  His  kingdom.  In 
Galilee  His  audiences  were  popular  and  His  aim  was  to 
establish  the  church.  2.  This  was  private  interview, 
with  a  well  disposed  inquirer.  (Cp.  Woman  of  Samaria.) 
§23.  John  3 :  22-36.  Jesus  remains  in  Judea  and  bap- 
tizes. Some  conjecture,  without  reason,  that  Christ  re- 
turned from  Jerus.  into  Gal.  Christ  leaves  Jerusalem, 
not  on  account  of  open  hostility,  but  because  after  offer- 
ing Himself  to  the  Jews,  he  had  been  rejected.  He  tar- 
ries in  Judea  (v.  22).  1.  National  promises  must  be 
fulfilled:  offer  of  Himself  be  made  more  general,  not 
restricted    to    a   single    feast.     He    may    have    attended 


68 

Pentecost  and  Tabei-nacles  dnrins:^  this  period.  2.  Jolm's 
testimony  liavin^r  not  yet  ended,  the  Galilean  Ministry 
could  not  proj)erly  beijin. 

Meagre  description  of  Christ's  work  at  this  period,  no 
miracles,  no  long  disconrses,  leads  to  inference  that  little 
was  done.  His  work  is  same  as  that  of  Bap.  1.  Facts 
show  likeness.  Chi'ist  employed  tlie  same  rite  as  John, 
with  same  import,  for  as  no  subsequent  mention  of  bap- 
tism occurs  until  Pentecost,  Chrtsiian  baptism  was  not 
instituted  until  after  Christ's  death.  2.  Christ's  early 
teachino;  in  Galilee,  evidently  similar  to  that  in  Judea, 
and  John  Bap.'s  work, are  described  in  the  same  language. 
3.  As  Christ's  work  and  John's  are  parallel  in  time,  both 
would  naturally  pursue  the  same  line  of  teaching.  There 
would  not  be  two  different  ba[)tisms  in  same  period  of  de- 
velopment. Remarks  :  John  Bap.'s  hold  on  the  masses 
gradually  transferred  to  Christ:  His  work  thus  growing 
out  of  John's.  They  do  not  unite,  for  that  would  destroy 
their  proper  relation.  Christ  stands  aside  as  Messiah. 
John  points  to  Him.  They  do  not  se|)arate  widel}',  either 
in  place  or  teaching,  lest  they  should  be  mistaken  for  rival 
prophets,  v.  24.  "John  was  not  yet  cast  into  prison." 
From  fcnirth  gospel  alone  no  e.xegetical  reason  can  be 
assigned  for  this  statement.  John  however  wrote  with 
Syn.  before  him.  They  make  no  mention  of  Judean 
ministry  but  date  Christ's  work  in  Gal.  from  the  impris- 
onment of  John  Bap.  John  shows  that  his  narrative  of 
Judean  work  does  not  conflict  with  any  Syn.  statements 
because  Christ  had  not  at  this  time  entered  upon  Gali- 
lean ministry  "  for  John  was  not  yet  cast  into  prison  i.  e. 
Bap.'s  testimony  was  not  yet  ended,  it  was  not  yet  time 
for  Christ  to  leave  Judea.  ^-Enon  near  Salim  probably 
in  Valley  of  Jordan  Western  side,  near  Jericho.  (Farrar 
I.  p.  202,  Note.) 

v.  25.  Question  started  as  to  purifying,  between  John's 
disciples  and  a  Jew  (Emended  Text" v.  25.  loonacoo.) 
Bap.'s  disciples  complain  to  him  of  Christ's  bai)tizing. 
He  bears  additional  testimony  to  Jesus  ;  declaring  that 
not  to  accept  Him  as  Messiah,  means  condemnation. 
(v.  3G.)    ^ 

V.  31-86.  Some  say  without  good  reason  that  these  are 
words  of  Evangelist,  ratlier  thiin  of  John  Bap.  for  they 
display  an  acquaintance  with  doctrines  not  then  revealed. 


69 

Points  of  interest.  1.  John  Bap.  still  had  a  body  of  dis- 
ciples. 2.  John  still  regards  his  ministry  subordinate  to 
Ciirist.     3.     Clear  views  of  John  noncerninu:  Clirist. 

§25.  John  4  :  4-42.  Woman  of  Samaria — S)/char.  This 
name  occurs  nowhere  else. in  scriiiture.  Common  view, 
that  it  is  nickname  for  Shechem,  meaning  "•  drunkard," 
or  "  liar  "  is  based  on,  Is.  28  :  1-7,  where  i.phraimites  are 
Ci\]\ed,  shiccoriai  ''drunkards;"  Hab.  2:18  moreh  slieker 
"  teacher  of  lies  "  which  is  said  to  reler  to  Moreh,  the 
original  name  of  district  of  Siiechem  ;  and  habitual  use 
by  John  oH hyoutvo:;  (v.  5)  to  denote  a  soubriquet  (cp.  11: 
16,  19:  13-17.) 

Some  say  Sychar  was  suburb  of  Shechem.  Jacob's 
well,  near  entrance  of  valley,  mile  from  present  city, 
"  one  of  few  spots  identified  with  Christ's  presence.'"' 
6th  hour  i.  e.  noon. 

Different  tone  of  woman  and  i*\icodemus.  l!^icodemus, 
sober,  grave,  and  earnest,  regards  Christ  as  teacher. 
Woman,  sprightly,  conversational,  looks  upon  Christ  as 
traveller.  Ciirist  varies  His  teaching  to  suit  each  case. 
With  Xicodemus  an  instructed  Jew,  lie  dwells  on 
technical  topics  of  religion  e.  g.  doctrines  of  new-birth. 
To  the  woman  He  speaks  of  a  supply  for  the  soul — thirst 
cornmou  to  all. 

Two  views  of  Samaritans,  1.  Common  view.  En- 
tirely heathen  ;  no  descent  from  Jacob,  no  right  to  0.  T. 
privileges.  2.  Mixed  race — remnants  of  10  tribes  and 
heathen  settlers — looking  for  Messiah  as  a  prophet  (John 
4  :  25j.  They  stand  in  N.  T.  as  a  link  between  Jews  and 
heathen.  Not  regarding  them  as  chosen  people.  Christ 
does  not  pursue  ministry  among  them  Mt.  10  :  5. 
Although  non- Judaic,  they  were  not  pagan  (v.  20). 

A  historical  import  of  this  incident,  prediction  of  the 
universal  spread  of  the  gospel, — the  natural  sequel  of 
discourse  with  Nicodemus.  To  him  Christ  taught  the 
spiritual  nature  of  His  kingdom.  If  spiritual  it  must  be 
universal,  and  all  formal  barriers  be  done  away. 

Smaritans  believd  on  hearing  Christ's  words  (v.  41,42). 
Jews  disbelieved  though  beholding  His  miracles. 

Sceptics  objeet :  Christ  here  nmkes  distinct  claim  to  Mes- 
siaship,  "  I  am  He,"  but  few  days  later,  in  Galilee,  for- 
bids any  allusion  to  his  divinity,  even  among  disciples. 


70 

Ans  :  Christ  is  ill  foreio;!!  country.  His  statements  would 
provoke  no  hostility  from  tlis  rulers.  This  is  no  real 
advance  on  His  teaching  to  JSTicodemus  or  John  Bapt's 
testimony  concerning  Him.  But  now  He  assumes  title 
of  Messiali  for  first  time. 

Distinguish  in  this  period  between  private  and  public 
teaching.  His  utterances  in  private  are  unrestrained,  in 
public,  symbolic. 

GALILEAN  MINISTRY. 

Ministry  in  Eastern    Galilee. 

Gal.  Ministry  extends  from  the  close  of  Jurlean  until 
the  three  last  feasts.  The  Feeding  of  5,000  divides  this 
Ministry  into  those  of  Eastern  and  Northern  Gal.  Its 
commencement  and  duration  depend  upon  two  questions. 

1.  Is  Syn.  journey  {M\.  4  :  12.  Mk.  1  :  14.  Lk.  4  :  14.) 
Same    as    that  ot  John   4,    or  subsequent  to  John    5? 

2.  Was  feast  of  John  5.  1.  Passover,  Pentecost,  Taber- 
nacles, Puriin  ?  Wieseler  has  attempted  to  settle  ques- 
tion first  by  historically^  making  time  of  John  Bap's  im- 
•prisonment  coincident  with  feast  of  Jol>n  5. 

Discussion  of  Qaen.  First.  I.  Those  identifying,  jour- 
neys argue.  \.  Motive  assigned  by  Syn.  and  John  for 
Christ's' leaving  Judoa  is  similar  (§24.  Mt.  4:  12,  Mk.  1 : 
14.  Lk.  4  :  14.  Jno.  4  :  1-3).  Syns.  say  it  was  im- 
prisonment of  John.  John  says  he  was  aware  that  Phari- 
sees knew  that  He  "  made  and  baptized  more  disciples 
tlian  John"  (ch.  6).  John  had  been  imprisoned  by  Herod 
through  Pharisaic  intrigue.  Hence  Jesus,  as  being  barn 
a  greater  object  of  hatred  than  John,  departed  into  Gal. 
to  avoid  persecution.  Two  ohj's:  a.  Syn.  do  not  mention 
Pharisees  as  concerned  in  John's  imprisonment.  Ans  : 
True  ;  but  if  not,  why  does  Jesus  leave  Judea  ?  A  pri- 
vate quarrel  between  Herod  and  John  is  no  sufficient  rea- 
son. Jno.  (3:25  certainly  implies  Pharisaic  hostility 
evinced  by  endeavors  to  stir  up  differences  between  John 
and  Jesus.  Jesus'  saying  (4  :  44)  that  "  a  prophet  hath 
no  honor  in  his  own  country  "  (i.  e.  Judea)  declares  hos- 
tility to  himself  and  hence  to  John  as  they  were  engaged 
in  the  same  work.  Objectors  cannot  say  that  Jesns  de- 
parted mcrelji  to  begin  His  Gal.  work,  for  according  to 
their  own   theory  the  Gal.   Ministry  does   not  begintill 


71  ' 

afteniext  Passover,  b.  If  John  was  imprisoned  by  Ilerod, 
liow  did  Christ  escape  persecution  by  goins^  to  Gal., 
Herod's  kingdom  ?  Christ's  mission  being  religions,  not 
politicah  Ans :  He  feared  Pharisees,  acting  upon  Her- 
od's example,  ratlier  tlian  Herod.  His  care  even  in  Gal. 
where  their  intinence  was  slight,  to  repress  Messianic 
entlinsiasm  and  His  reserve  as  to  his  Messiahship,  show 
his  apprehension  of  tlieir  hostility. 

2.  Journey  of  John  4:  43  is  emphasized  as  though  a 
formal  leaving  of  Judea,  while  the  return  to  Gal.  after 
feast  of  John  5  is  passed  over  without  mention.  Gess. 
characterizes  John  4  :  43  as  comm.  on  Mt..4:  14. 

3.  The  discourse  with  Sam.  woman  (John  4)  precisely 
accords  with  this  view.  Christ,  rejected  by  the  Jews, 
and  about  entering  on  His  Gal.  ministry,  discloses  the 
nniversalit}'  of  the  gospel. 

4.  Reception  given  Christ  in  Gal.  (John  4  :  45)  implies 
a  formal  beginning  of  His  work  there  of  which  John 
gives  a  specimen  4:  46-54.  If  His  work  did  not  com- 
mence at  this  time,  if  the  Syn.  account  be  not  inserted 
here,  four  months  from  this  arrival  until  feast  of  John 
5  :  1  are  unaccounted  for,  a  single  miracle  alone  being 
recorded.  5.  At  feast  of  John  5,  John  Bapt.'s  mifiistry 
is  referred  to  as  past  (v.  35  '■'■was  a  light"),  hence  his 
imjirisonment  and  Christ's  consequent  entering  upon  the 
Gal.  ministry  must  be  placed  before  John  5. 

II.  Those  holding  journeys  of  Syn.  and  John  4  to  be 
different,  argue  :  1.  The  exegesis  of  John  4 : 1  implies 
that  John  was  still  at  large  ivide  And.  p.  162;  Wies.  161  ; 
Gres.  II.  212.)  Ans  :  Best  comm.  explain,  "John  was  not 
as  successful  as  Jesus." 

2.  From  John  4  :  54,'"  this  is  again  second  miracle," 
etc.,  which  mention  seems  to  indicate  that  this  miracle, 
like  the  first  at  Cana,  was  something  out  of  the  ordinary 
course  of  events,  it  has  been  argued  that  the  regular  Gal, 
ministry  had  not  yet  begun.  Aiis :  The  emphasis  lies 
upon  f)3cov,  i.  e.,  second  miracle  performed  by  Christ 
coming  out  of  Judea  info  Galilee. 

3.  Ilostilfty  of  Pharisees  undeveloped  until  charge  of 
Sabbnth-breaking  at  feast  (John  5).  Ans:  Hostility  in 
its  effects  is  certainly  spoken  o'f  in  ch.  3  :  22  and  4  :  3. 

4.  Unless  Syn.  account  be  introduced  after  John  5,  we 
are  obliged  to  bring  in   after  this   time  a  Passover  not 


•   72 

mentioned  by  Syn.  Ans :  Tliis  nr2:nnient  does  not  liold 
(Vr)  in.  mrtn^ure — Syn.  omit  other  feasts,  e.  <>:.,  Tabei-naeles 
and  Dedication — nor  [b)  in  mode — it  is  not  tlieir  plan  to 
record  feasts  at  Jernsalem. 

Ai\2:iimcnts  pro  and  con  nearly  balance.  Compromise 
view  is  held  by  Ellicott  and  Tiscliendorf,  influenced  by 
Wieseler's  chronology,  who  say  Syn.  journey  and  that  of 
John  4  is  identical,  3'et  Syn.  hisioiy/  does  not  commence 
till  after  John  5.  Aiis  :  The  statement  of  Lk  4  :  14,  "Je- 
sus returned  in  power  of  Spirit  into  Gal."  is  irreconcilable 
with  this  view  of  four  months  of  inactivity.  Also  state- 
ments intimat-ely  connected  must  be  forcibly  se|>arated. 
(Tiscli.in  later  editions  makes  retractions  from  Wieseler's 
scheme  of  chronology.)  Result.  Weight  of  authority 
places  John  Bap.'s  imprisonment  at  John  4,  and  thus 
identifies  journeys  (So  Lange,  Gess,  Farrar,  Robinson, 
G  res  we  II.) 

Discussion  of  Ques.  Second.  What  was  feast  of  John 
5:1?  (Vide.  Chronology  on  Duration  of  Public  Ministry 
also  Farrar,  Vol.  I.  p.  368  and  Vol.  II.  p.  467  Excursus 
VIII.).  If  the  feast  be  not  Passover  the  Gal.  ministry 
will  be  shortened  by  one  year.  The  method  of  combin- 
ing these  two  central  points  determines  the  entire  Chro- 
nology of  Gospel  History,  and  a  knowledge  of  it  is  a  key 
to  the  understanding  of  any  harmony.  Adjustments  of 
different  harmonists  : 

1.  Robinson  identifies  the  journeys;  feast  of  John  5,  he 
considers  Passover;  hence,  ministry  in  Eastern  Gal.  16 
months,  in  Northern  Gal.  6  months,  total  Gal.  ministry 
22  months. 

2.  Andrew's  places  Syn.  journey  after  John  5.  :  consid- 
ers feast  Passover;  hence  E.  Gal.  12  months,  N".  Gal.  6 
months,  total  Gal.  ministry  18  months.  Christ  inactive 
in  Gal.  4  months  before  John  o  :  1. 

3.  Lichtenstein — places  Syn.  journey  after  John  5; 
considers  feast  Tabernacles  (in  Oct.  6  months  later)  : 
hence  E.  Gal.  6  months,  N.  Gal.  6  months,  total  Gal. 
ministry  1  year.     Christ  inactive  10  months. 

4.  Wieseler — places  Syn,  journey  after  John  5.:  con- 
siders feast  Purim  (one  month  l)efore  Passover  John  6  : 
4  according  to  his  scheme  second  Passover)  :  hence  E. 
Gal.  1   month,  E.  Gal.  6  months,  total    Gal.    ministry  7 


73 

months.  Result  of  this  plan  is  demonstratio)i  of  its  fal- 
sit}^  J^iving  but  one  month  to  E,  Gul.  to  wliich  otiier 
schemes  give  six  or  twelve.  This  was  most  active  period 
of  Christ's  life  :  time  is  needed  for  development  of  Phar- 
isaic opposition,  |or  change  of  popular  sentiment,  for 
growth  of  faith,  for  falling  off  of  the  merely  curious. 
Mission  of  Twelve  alone  would  occupy  more  than  one 
month. 

5.  Lange,  Gess,  Farrar — identify  journeys  ;  consider 
feast  Purim;  avoid  Wieseler's  brevity  in  E.  Gal.  by  begin- 
ning Gal.  ministry  between  John  4,  and  5,  thus  length- 
ening E.  Gal.  to  5  months.  They  synchronize  John  5, 
and  Mt.  11,  also  John  6.  (Second  Passover  according  to 
their  scheme)  and  Mt.  14. 

6.  Ellicott,  Tischendorf,  vide  supra.  "  Compromise 
view." 

General  Re  salt.  Harmon}- shows  no  contradiction  in- 
validating the  Gospel  narratives.  Note.  1.  Robinson's 
scheme,  identifying  journej-s,  making  feast  John  5:  1, 
Passover,  gives  needed  time  in  E.  Gal,  and  accounts  for 
facts.  Individual  bias  eliminated,  we  come  back  to  this 
scheme. 

2.  In  no  respect  do  these  different  schemes  affect  apol- 
ogetic importance  of  Harmony.  Same  periods,  with  same 
relations,  intentions,  and  order,  occur  in  all.  They  differ 
only  as  to  time  of  beginning  Gal.  ministry,  its  length,  and 
rapidity  of  its  development. 

Order  of  events  during  tliis  period  of  ministry  in  E. 
Gal  :  Narrative  gathered  from  three  Syn.  who  are  some- 
times parallel,  sometimes  supplemental.  In  obtaining 
chronological  order,  positive  statements,  wdien  occurring, 
are  to  be  followed,  in  other  circumstances  probabilities 
are  to  be  considered.  The  order  is  more  irregular  be- 
cause of  activity  and  greaf  number  of  events,  but  the 
commencement  (imprisonment  of  John)  and  close  (feed- 
ing 5000)  are  tixed.  Nothing  following  the  passover  of 
Jolm  6  :  4  is  to  be  included  in  this  period,  for  no  inter- 
change of  events  between  periods  occurs  in  several  gos- 
pels. 

Robinson  arbitrarily  takes  Lk.  11-13  :  9  belonging  to 
last  journeys  to  Jerusalem  and,  breaking  up,  inserts,  in 
E.  Gal.     Mk.'s  and  Lk.'s  order  scarcely  disturbed  ;  only 


74 

deviations   Mk.   §§  24,  58,  Lk.  §§  29,  58.      Matt,    much 
disturbed  in  adapting  to  their  order.     To  justify,  note 

1.  Mt.  makes  no  statement  as  to  sequence  in  portions 
changed.  Tors  often  used  loosely  as  connective,  when 
no  consecution  is  intended. 

2.  Mt.'s  gospel  is  topical,  e.  g.,  Teaching,  5-7;  Mirii- 
cles,  8-9;  Parables,  13.  Chronological  ovdev  qcneral ; 
after  Feeding  5000,  consecutive. 

CharaderiMics  of  this  perwd,  are  1.  Activity,  frequent 
journeys,  development  of  plan,  miracles  and  teaching. 
Christ's  greatest  success  is  achieved  ;  opposition  is 
aroused.  2.  Preparation  for  founding  the  church,  re- 
jection of  Jews  as  a  nation  being  not  "vet  final.  Christ 
renews  the  offer  of  himself  at  feast  of  John  5. 

Relation  of  Gal.  to  Judean  work.  Jesus'  Messiahship 
and  the  future  church  are  the  subjects  of  both  periods, 
butin  different  order.  In  Judea  the  prominent  theme 
IS  his  Messiahship,  in  Gal.  the  church,  also  sacrificial  ele- 
ment enters  from  succeeding  period.  This  blending  of 
the  period  as  record  of  a  single  life,  the  best  answe^-  to 
sceptical  objection  of  irreconcilable  discrepancies. 

P'our  successive  subjects  of  this  period  twice  repeated 
are, 

1.  Organization.  Call  of  apostles,  that  there  may  be 
witnesses  of  Christ's  work,  who  shall  f)nnd  and  guide 
the  church  after  his  ascension.  2.  Miracles.  Attesta- 
tions of  Christ's  divinity.  N'ot  arbitrary  works  of  power, 
but  a  regularly  developed  system.  3,  Opposition.  At 
first  secret,  it  increased  until  Christ  was  driven  from 
Capernaum,  after  which  it  became  the  main  feature  of 
his  life.  4.  Teaching,  a.  Extended  discourses,  b.  Para- 
bles.    (Andr.  divides  arbitrarily  by  "circuits.") 

These  topics  are  interwoven  ;  e.  g.  call  of  apostles 
(organization)  is  connected  with  miracles  ;  miracles  not 
oidy  attest  divinity,  but  teach  spiritual  truth  ;  opposition 
IS  linked  with  teaching  (John  10,)  and  parables  (Mt.  21  : 
23-46.)  Teaching  to  some  extent  linked  with  all.  Christ 
IS  set  forth  Prophet  (teaching),  Priest  (propitiation),  King 
(organization).  2nd  Passover  divides  ministry  in  E.  Gab 
into  two  parts  of  4  and  12  months.  Smaller  period,  dur- 
ing which  Christ's  place  of  work  is  laid  down  and  de- 
veloped, is  basis  of  Gal.  ministrv. 


75 

Characteristics  of  4  months  period.  Choice  of  apostles. 
Miracles,  selected  as  specimens  of  important  chisses. 
Miracles  predominate  over  teaching.  People  are  first 
aroused,  then  taught. 

§26.  John  4  :  48-45.  Mt.  4  :  17.  Mk.  1  :  14,  15.  Lk. 
4  :  14,15.  Arrival  ill  Galilee.  Reception  Christ  was  cor- 
dial, Galileans  havijig  witnessed  Christ's  miracles  in 
Jerus.,  (John  4:  45),  John  4:  44  "his  own  country." 
Meyer,  Alford  and  Andrews  (p.  168)  say  Gal.  is  meant; 
others  Nazareth,  (Farrar  Vol.  I.  pp.  219);  best  opinion  is 
Judea,  his  native  country.  Supplemental  character  of 
John's  gospel  is  seen  in  calling  Judea  Christ's  country, 
though  not  mentioning  his  birth  there.  Subject  "of 
Christ's  teaching  :    Kingdom  of  God  at  hand,  (Mk.  1:  15. 

§27.  John  4  :  46-54.  Nobleman's  son  at  Capernaum, 
healed.  Only  event  recorded  by  John  between  Christ's 
leaving  Judea  to  begin  work  in  Gal.,  and  his  return  to  2d 
Passover.  (5:1).  John  inserts  to  contrast  faith  of 
Galileans — and  unbelief  of  Jews. 

V.  54.  Emphasis  on  eA&cov,  showing  Christ  wrought 
this  cure  "  as  he  was  going  "  to  Gal.  Hence  insert  before 
Syn.  narratives. 

Strauss.  This  miracle  same  as  that  Mt.  8  :  15  circum- 
stances being  the  same  ;  but  the  differences  are  contra- 
dictions, hence  both  are  false,  mere  myths  based  on 
Naaman's  being  healed  at  distance  by  Elijah.  Ans:  The 
differences  of  time  and  place,  plainly  prove  two  distinct 
miracles  (Trench  on  .Mir,  p.  100). 

§28.  Lk.  4:  16-31,  Mr.  4:  13-16.  Announcement, 
Rejection  at  Nazareth.  Do  Lk.  4  :  16,  Mt.  13 :  54,  Mk.  6  : 
1  as  Lange,  Farrar  and  Lich.  say,  refer  to  the  same  event? 
Robinson  and  Andrews  hold  that  these  passages  record 
distinct  occurrences,  because  1.  Mt.  mentions  Christ's 
removal  from  Naz.  to  Cap.  prior  to  Mt.  13  :  54  and  Mk. 
6:  1,  Lk.  4:  28-31,  assigns  his  rejection  at  N'az.  as  the 
reason.  2.  Lk.  4  :  29,  30,  after  discourse  in  synagogue, 
Christ  escaped  death  miraculouslj^ ;  Mk.  6:  5,  mentions 
Christ  healing  sick  at  I^az.  after  discourse  thus  showing 
there  was  no  tumult. 

3.  Two  visits  not  impossible.  Would  most  probably 
make  his  own  countrymen  more  than  one  offer.  (Comp. 
Andrews,  p.  198.) 


76 

Reason  for  Visit.  Christ  first  proclaimed  his  mission 
at  Jerus.,  the  religious  centre  of  God's  chosen  people. 
So  at  the  outset  of  Galilean  ministry  he  aft'ords  his  own 
kinsmen  earliest  opportunity  of  accepting  him.  Driven 
from  Nazareth,  he  goes  to  Capernanm  (Mt.  4  :  13),  reject- 
ed there,  he  retnrns  to  Nazareth  a  second  time.  (Matt. 
13  :  54.) 

Synagogue  nsages.  (Farrar  I.  p.  220.)  Only  instance 
of  Christ's  reading,  usually  addressed  the  people.  (Cp. 
Acts  13  :  15.)  Chri-^t's  intentions  were  not  revolutionary. 
He  conforms  to  Jewish  habits.  Sacraments  are  first 
innovations.  First  time  Christ  applies  prophecy  to  him- 
self Is:  61  :  1,  describes  work  and  character  of  Mes- 
siali.     Christ  declares  the  passage  refers  to  himself. 

Contrast.  Christ's  rejection  at  Jerusalem  following 
an  act  symbolizing  judgment  (cleansing  temple) ;  at  Naz- 
areth after  proclaiming  the  gospel.  Gospel  preaching, 
severe  or  mild,  to  natural  man  displeasing.  Hearers 
become  suddenly  enraged,  because  Christ  taught  the 
coming  rejection  of  Jews  and  calling  of  Gentiles,  illus- 
trating this  truth  by  O.  T.  facts  (1  Kings  17;  2  Kings  5  : 
14).  Blind,  impulsive,  uncontrollable  rage,  not  to  be 
explained  by  proverbial  rudeness  of  Nazarines,  for  Christ's 
allusions  to  national  rejection. 

Was  escape  miraculous  ?  Not  so,  some.  Impressive- 
ness.  (Farrar,  I.,  p.  227.)  But  as  occurred  among  those 
familiar  with  him  supernatural  escape  more  consistent. 
Similar  escapes,  comp.  John  7 :  30  ;  8  :  59;  10  :  39. 

Lk.  4:23.  What  miracles?  1.  Cross  reference  to 
John,  either  2  :  12  (some  suppose  miracles  wrought  wliile 
on  way  to  1st  Pass.),  or,  2.  Nobleman's  son,  John  4:46 
—54. 

Settled  at  Capernaum  for  at  least  one  j-ear  with  Peter 
or  his  mother.  Selected  because  central,  populous  ;  Eo- 
man  garrison  ;  commerce  in  fish;  on  caravan  route  ;  suf- 
ficiently distant  from  Tiberias,  Herod's  capital.  Vide. 
Farrar,  L,  p.  178.)  Mt.  4  ;  13,  14,  records  this  as  fulfilling 
Is.  9:1,2,  ''  by  way  of  sea." 

Site  of  Capernaum  :  It  lay  in  plain  of  Gennesareth, 
which  was  4  miles  in  length.  E.xact  locality  is  unknown  ; 
either  Khan  Minyeh  (Robinson)  or  Tell  Hum  (Farrar,  p. 
181 ;  Andrews,  pp.  203-220.)     Unmentioned  in  O.  Test. 


77 

Josepluis  carried  there  when  wonnded.  He  hiys  stress 
on  tomitains  (Jos.  iii.  10,  §8)  and  lish.  Same  ionntains 
at  Khan  Minveh,  some  say.  IsTame  Capernanin  (Kefr, 
Nahum,  i.  e.  "ViMage  ofNahnm)  favors  Tell  Hum.  Tell, 
hill,  substituted  for  Kefr,  villag'e:  ISTahum  abbrev.  Lake 
called  in  O.  T.,  Chinnereth,  Josh.  13  :  27.  ''Harp  shape," 
(Farrar,  I.,  p.  175,  note.)  Sea  of  Galilee,  of  Tiberias, 
Lake  of  Gennesaret,  14  miles  long,  6  broad,  600  fr,  below 
Medit'n,  shut  in  by  liills,  abounds  with  fish.  Shores 
thickly  settled,  9  populous  cities.  Tiberias  and  Magdala 
alone  remain.  Climate  varied,  botli  temperate  and  trop- 
ical ;  vegetation  luxuriant,  fruit  continuous. 

§29.  Organization.  Lk.  5:  1-11;  Mt.  4:18-22;  Mk. 
1 :  10-20.  Call  of  Peter,  And.,  James,  John,  first  act  of 
Gal.  ministry,  that  from  hef/uiwn;/  Christ  may  have  wit- 
nesses and  teachers. 

Two  theories  of  call.  1.  Naturalistic.  Simply  adhered 
to  Christ  from  choice  as  Bap.'s  disciples.  Gradually, 
more  devoted  and  enthusiastic  attached  themselves  more 
closely  to  his  person.  Ans  :  Contradicts  gospel  narrative. 
Call  is  earliest  act  of  Christ,  showing  foresight  in  select- 
ing men  best  qualified  for  his  work.  2.  Mild  rationalists 
admit  early  call,  accounting  for  it  by,  a,  Christ's  natural 
sagacity  ;  b.  his  natural  discernment  of  character.  Ans: 
Inadequate  to  account  for  liistorical  phenomena. 

Circumstances,  a,  Public,  Lk.  5  :  1,  so  validity  of  call 
is  attested.  6,  Selected,  not  from  educated,  prejudiced 
class,  but  simple  hearted,  best  adapted  for  Clirist's  work. 
Their  knowledge  was  to  come  from  inspiration.  Extreme 
poverty  erroneous  ;  in  good  business,  partners,  had  "hired 
servants."  Mk.  1  :  20 ;  "left  all"  no  sacrifice  unless  some- 
thing left.  Subsequent  poverty  voluntary.  Blunt  :  Zeb- 
edee  very  old  at  this  time  and  soon  died.  Comp.  Mt.  8  : 
21  "  bury  my  father,"  Mt.  20:  20  ''mother  of  Zebedee's 
children,"  Last,  unnatural  if  Z.  alive,  c.  Miracle  proved 
authority  of  call  ;  illustrated  office  and  work  to  be  under- 
taken :  toil,  patience,  ultimate  success  depending  upon 
God,  then  labor  and  God's  power  to  cooperate.  (Trench, 
miracles,  p.  106.)  Some  symbolize  minutest  details. 
Canon  of  allegorical  interpretation:  Those  facts  alone 
significant,  originally  intended  to  be  such.  Lk.  places 
call   after  miracles  at  Cap.  (Lk.  4:33-41.)    other   Syn. 


78 

before.     Lk.  wishes  to  contrast  rejection  at  Nnz.  on   one 
Sabbath,  enthusiastic  reception  at  Cap.  on  the  next. 

Difterences.  1.  Mt.,  Mk.  record  no  miracle,  Lk.  omits 
Andrew's  name,  hence  some  say  calls  are  different.  Bnt 
omissions  are  not  contradictions,  and  a  incidents  in  each 
are  same,  b  after  call  both  accounts  say  they  left  all  and 
followed  Christ.  Lk.  records  miracle  wishing  to  show- 
deep  impression  on  Peter's  mind. 

2.  Lk.  says,  called  while  in  boat,  one  call  for  all.  Mt., 
Mk.  on  shore,  mending  nets,  each  pair  of  brothers  called 
separately.  Harmonize  by  making  these  acts  successive. 
Order.  Christ's  discourse,  miracle,  beckoning  to  other 
boat  for  aid,  call  of  Simon  and  Andrew,  Christ  afterward 
walking  on  shore  finds  Jas.,  John  mending  the  broken 
net  and  calls  them.  (Smith's  Diet.  Peter,  p.  2447,  An- 
drews, p.  228.) 

3.  Syn.  apparently  contradict  John  who  puts  call  year 
previous  (John  1  :  35)  hence,  say  sceptics,  both  accounts 
mythical.  Ans.  Syn.  don't  say  first  call  ;  "  at  My  word" 
implies  previous  acquaintance,  readiness  in  leaving  busi- 
ness shows  minds  made  up.  Gospels  give  distinct  stages 
of  organization  in  calling  of  the  apostles,  a.  John  1,  call 
at  Jordan  to  be  learners,  not  required  to  leave  home  or 
relinquish  business,  b.  Lk.  5.  To  be  witnesses,  in  con- 
stant attendance  on  Christ,  c.  Mk.  3:  13,  14.  Prior  to 
sermon  on  Mt.  Definite  organization  of  Twelve.  d. 
Lk.  9:  1-6.  Temporary  commission  conferring  authorit}'' 
to  preaclt  and  work  miracles.  Full  apostolic  authority, 
not  until  Pentecost.  Miracle  is  an  event  in  external  world 
due  to  immediate  agency  of  God.  (Hodge's  Theol.  Vol. 
L  p.  618.J 

Some  argue  effect  here  might  be  produced  witliout 
divine  interference,  b}'  union  of  second  causes  and  divine 
prescience,  hence  analogous  to  propliecy.  Supernatural 
element  just  as  great  but  strictly  miraculous  element,  i.  e. 
immediate  exercise  of  divine  power,  does  not  enter. 
(Comp.  stater  in  fish's  niouth  Mt.  17  :  27.  Comp.  Ps.  8  : 
8).  Trench  insists  on  this  distinction  :  allow  second 
causes  where  we  can.  But,  1.  These  two  cases  belong  to 
class  of  events  where  Divine  efficiency  is  intended  to  be 
set  forth.  Ordinary  reader  makes  no  distinction.  2. 
Impression  on  mind  of  eye  witnesses  opposes  this  dis- 


79 

tinction.  3.  Symbolical  import  of  miracle  overlooked 
by  this  view.  It  teaches,  God  not  only  foreknows,  but 
his  power  cooperates  with  linman. 

MiKACLES.  1.  Classification.  Some  speak  of  miracles 
of  knowledge,  of  power,  .of  love.  But  sncli  classifica- 
tion is  objectionable,  foi",  aceordinp;  to  definiiion,  all  mir- 
acles are  acts  of  power.  If  they  are  not  acts  of  Divine 
power  immediatel}'  exercised  they  are  not  miracles.  The 
expression  "  Miracle  "  should  he  kept  distinct  and  ap- 
plied to  a  special  class  of  events.  Regeneration  etc. 
should  not  be  termed  miracle.  Power,  love,  etc.  ma}*  how- 
ever be  used  to  distinguish  the  main  design  of  the  miracle. 

2.  Various  naynes.  (Vide  Trench  p.  75).  Gospels 
speak  (^^  a.  aYjiucav,  a  token  of  presence  and  working 
of  God.  I),  zena^,  a  wonder,  astonishment  of  beholder 
transferred  to  the  work.  c.  ouvaa-cz,  powers  i.  e.  of  God. 
d.  Efiya^  works  i.  e.  of  Divinity. 

3.  Twofold  design,  and  proof  of  each.  a.  Attract 
attention  and  impress  ;  for  alwaj's  in  the  presence  of 
witnesses;  cases  of  popular  sympathy  ;  impression  always 
recorded,  b'  Relieve  suffering  ;  for  same  o^ce  might  have 
been  produced  by  miracles  of  different  characters,  i.  e. 
of  judgment.  Fig-tree  cursed  is  the  only  miracle  of  thi8 
class.  Destruction  of  swine  work  of  demons,  not  of 
Christ,  c.  Teach  truth;  they  are  dramatized  parables, 
each  teaching  some  aspect  of  truth. 

They  teach:  a.  Christ's  power  and  willingness  to  save 
souls;  b.  Sinner's  condition  and  way  of  approach,  by 
prayer  and  faith.  Disease  and  death  are  parts  of  the 
pen"a)ty  of  sin  inflicted  by  the  curse  of  the  law  ;  hence 
when  these  are  removed  a  prrt  of  the  punishment  of  sin 
is  removed.  Mt.  8:  16,  17  quoted  from  Is.  53  :  4.  The 
atonement  also  is  thus  taught,  Christ  bearing  oar  sins. 
d.  Attest  Christ^s  claims  ;  for  Christ  says  (Lk.  5 :  23,  24) 
"whether  is  easier  "  .  .  .  ''\mt  XXvaI  ]je  maij  know '' 
etc.  Vide  also  Mt.  11  :  3-5.  Rationalists  say,  "  if  these 
miracles  were  real,  why  disbelieved?  Ans  :  Abraham's 
answer  is  sufficient,  Lk.  16  :   31. 

Christ's  miracles  contrasted  with  those  of  O.  T.  and  of 
Apostles.  1.  His  were  performed  by  his  own  power. 
Others  were  wrought  in  his  name  or  that  of  God.  It  is 
no  fair  exception," as   Rationalists  declare,  that  Christ  is 


80 

said  to  sometimes  work  "  by  power  of  God,"  "  by  spirit 
of  God,"  "  by  tiiiger  of  God."  Tliere  were  special  rea- 
sons for  Christ's  procedure  on  these  spetnal  occasions, 
Som.etimes  also  Christ's  true  humanity  is  expressed  by 
his  faith.  2.  O.  T.  miracles  were  punitive,  tliose  of  Christ 
were  miracles  of  mercy.  3.  O.  T.  miracles  largely  con- 
fined to  the  sphere  of  nature;  Christ's  were  performed 
in  all  si)heres,  the  larger  portion  on  man.  4.  O.  T.  mira- 
cles wrouglit  with  delay,  wrestling  in  prayer;  Christ's 
were  performed  with  case,  instantaneously. 

The  number  of  Christ's  miracles  must  have  been  in- 
definitelv  great ;  as  the  cases  recorded  are  mere  speci- 
mens. Vide  Mt.  4 :  24,  8 :  16,  11 :  5,  14 :  2,  15  :  30.  V\^e 
may  imagine  that  no  cases  whicli  could  be  brought  to 
him  were  not  brought.  Wlierever  Christ  went  disease 
and  death  disappeared.  Thus  was  signified  the  fulness 
and  sutiiciency  of  Christ's  salvation. 

A  selection  from  this  vast  number  is  made  upon  the 
principle  that  each  case  shall  make  prominent  some  new 
phase  of  truth.  When  repeated  it  is  because  of  a  difter- 
ence  in  method  of  cure,  or  the  eftect  upon  the  subject,  or 
on  account  of  some  new  development  in  the  work  of 
Christ. 

Nicmhcr  recorded.  Some  include  those  of  which  Christ 
was  the  subject,  e.  g.,  birth,  resurrection,  escape  from  popu- 
lace. Otliers  include  also  tlie  case  of  Mary  Magdalene, 
although  it  is  not  mentioned  in  detail.  Omitting  these 
the  number  may  be  given  as  35.  9  on  external  nature, 
26  of  healing.  Mt.  records  20,  Mk.  18,  Lk.  20,  John  8. 
Only  one  is  common  to  all  evangelists,  viz.  feeding  of  5,- 
000.  Eleven  are  common  to  three,  viz.  10  to  Mt.,  Mk. 
and  Lk.;  1  to  Mt.,  Mk.,  John.  Six  were  common  to  two, 
viz.,  3  to  Mt.,  Mk.,  2  to  Mt.,  Lk.,  1  to  Mk.,  Lk.  Mt. 
records  3  alone,  Mk.  2,  Lk.  6,  John  6.    ■* 

F«r<'oM5  principles  of  classification.  1.  With  reference 
to  power  dis|)layed  and  sphere  of  exercise  ;  upon  man  ; 
upon  nature;  inanimate  and  animate  ;  upon  spirit  world. 

2.  By  truths  embodied,  a.  Christ  a  Savior  with  almiglity 
power,     h.  Character  of  sinner,  blind,  polluted,  disabled. 

3.  liy  faith  of  recipient,  whether  [)ersonal  or  intercessory, 
strong  or  weak,  that  of  a  Jew  or  Gentile.  4.  Mode  of 
working,  at  hand  or  at  a  distance,  byword  or  touch.  It 
is  impoohible  to  make  a  perfect  clas-;ification. 


81 

Theories.  I.  Rationalistic,  Miracles  are  impossible. 
Those  seeniin2:ly  niiracnlons  occurrences  alone  took  place 
which  may  be  ex[»iained  naturally.  A  distinction  is  made 
between  miracles  of  healing  and  those  in  which  nature 
is  the  subject  of  Christ's  power.  The  former  are  admit- 
ted because  tliey  may  be  naturally  explained  ;  the  latter 
are  denied  because  inexplicable.  Their  presence  in  the 
narrative  is  accounted  for  upon  the  mf/thk-al  hypothesis. 
Paulus:  Jesus  was  a  physician,  having  acquired  his  art 
from  the  Essenes;  lie  gave  prescriptions;  a  list  of  medi- 
cines is  enumerated  from  contemporaneous  authors. 
Celsus:  Christ  performed  miracles  by  means  of  magical 
arts  learned  in  Egypt.  Renan  :  Christ  performed  mira- 
cles against  his  will.  Popular  expectation  as  to  the  Mes- 
siah compelled  him  to  become  a  wonder-worker.  Hence 
his  miracles  vrere  mere  deceptions. 

Ans  :  The  Scrijiture  narrative  represents  Christ  as 
working  without  means,  and  producing  by  word  alone 
instantaneous  effects. 

IL.Psychologico-Ethical.  Christ's  miracles  the  result 
of  animal  magnetism  ;  due  simply  to  the  influence  of  mind 
over  the  bodily  condition.  The  theory  is  based  upon 
observed  facts,  proving  a,  a  mysterious  influence  of  mind 
over  mind,  and,  b,  the  influence  of  mind  and  will  over 
body.  In  support  of  tljis  view,  1.  The}-  argue  from 
Scripture,  that  faith  was  required  in  all  cases  in  the  recip- 
ient or  the  cure  could  not  be  performed,  e.  g.,  no  miracles 
in  Nazareth  "  because  of  unbelief,"  Mt.  13:  58.  In  Gal. 
generally  the  people  were  in  sympathy  with  him,  hence 
he  could  perform  miracles.  2.  Stress  is  laid  on  Christ's 
human  sympathy,  his  cjommanding  presence,  his  superior 
spiritualitj'.  Thus  he  projected  himself  into  the  con- 
sciousiiess  of  others.  Some  miracles,  e.  g.,  raising  of 
dead,  healing  of  congenital  blindness,  cure  of  leper,  can- 
not be  thus  explained.  Hence  some  are  rejected.  As  to 
others,  it  is  said  that  Christ  merely  declared  a  cure 
already  wrou2:ht. 

Strauss :  Derogatory  to  make  Christ's  success  depend 
not  on  teaching  but  on  momentary  power.  Character  of 
Jesus  is  weighted  down  with  these  cures.  O.  T.  records 
cures,  therefore  Christ  performed  some,  but  only  when 
he  could  not  avoid  so  doinof."     Stress   laid   on    "  siijn  " 


82 

being  asked  for,  hence  no  miracles  performed.  "  Sign 
ofJona"  referred  to  the  preaching  of  Jonah.  Christ 
commanded  tlie  discip'es  of  Baptist  to  report  to  him  the 
spiritual  results  of  his  work — not  real  miracles — when  he 
said  "  the  blind  see,"  etc.,  Mt.  11  :  4,  5. 

Strauss  rejects  all  miracuk^us  cures  ;  all  miracles  with 
accompanying  conversations  ;  miracles  introduced  later 
to  explain  the  conversation  ;  all  mentioned  as  occurring 
twice;  all  to  which  there  are  analogous  parables — the 
allegory  transl'ormed  by  later  writers  into  a  miracle. 
Thus  tlie  number  is  reduced,  the  residuum  is  explained 
away. 

All  such  writers  are  involved  in  the  following  dilemma : 
either  Christ  is  a  mere  enthusiast,  uot  above  the  people, 
or  a  conscious  deceiver.  In  either  case  how  could  Christ 
be  a  moral  teacher,  the  author  of  the  Christian  religion  ? 
Yet  this  they  hold. 

§30.  Mk.  1 :  21-38.  Lk.  4  :  31-37.  HeM.lmg  Demoniac 
ill  Stjnafjogae.  Lk.  says  Christ's  tirst  Sabbath  in  Cap'm  ; 
next  after  rejection  at  Nazareth.  Taught  in  Synag.  with 
aw^Ao?"%  ;  during  service  healed  demoniac.  Miracles  of 
dispossession  peculiar  to  N.  T.  Jdctirov,  oacnovcov,  in 
Homer=<ycoc;  in  later  Ok,  (Plato)  beings  intermediate 
between  God  and  man  ;  Philo  and  Josephus,  souls  of  men, 
especially  the  wicked  ;  Socrates,  good  spirit,  tutelar  di- 
vii.ity  ;  LXX.,  heathen  idols,  lience  Paul  (1  Cor.  10  :  19), 
heathen  sacrifice  to  dacu.ovta.  E.  V.  "devils  "  incorrect, 
for  in  X.  T.  but  one  dca^iuAu:;.  His  servants  are  demons. 
(Smith's  Dic'y,  Demons,  p.  583.)  (Demoniacs,  Trench, 
p.  125.     Neander's  Life  Christ,  pp.  145-151.) 

Design  of  this  class  of  miracles  is  to  exhibit  man  as  by 
nature  the  helpless  bond-slave  of  Satan,  and  Christ  as  the 
only  one  able  to  effect  his  deliverence.  While  Christ 
was  upon  earth  peculiar  license  seems  granted  to  evil 
spirits.  His  power  over  them,  besides  attesting  his  di- 
vinity was  fulHUment  of  the  Protevangelium.  Gen.  3  : 
15.  Seven  curses  (including  Mary  Magdelene)  of  demon- 
iacal posession  are  recorded. 

Objections.  1.  Phenomena  of  possession  contradict 
consciousness.  Will  is  free.  It  cannot  be  so  wholly  con- 
trolled by  an  unseen  being  much  less  could  several 
demons  possess  one  man.     Ans.     We  must  not  look  to 


83 

consciousness  for  information  respecting  facts  outside  the 
sphere  of  consciousness.  Scripture  teaches  Satan  has 
access  to  minds  of  men,  to  lead  tliem  captive  at  his  will. 
Possession  must  have  accorded  with  their  nature  and  ours. 

2.  Possession  not  recorded  elsewhere  in  Scripture  and 
does  not  now  occur :  Ans.  Latter  position  cannot  be 
proved.  Special  propriety  of  such  cases  at  time  of  Christ ; 
culmination  of  the  conliict  between  the  kingdoms  of 
good  and  evil.  Saul  is  an  instance  found  in  O.  Test.  3. 
No  curse  of  this  kind  mentioned  in  John  but  all  are  in 
Gal.  Ans.  Silence  proves  nothing.  Joiin  does  introduce 
the  obnoxious  doctrine.  John  8:48.  "hast  a  devil," 
18:  27  "  after  the  sop  Satan  entered  into  him."  John 
records  only  miracles  introducing  long  discourses,  hence 
these  omitted.  4.  Demoniacal  possession  is  analogous  to 
mania,  idocy,  epilepsy,  etc.,  hence  mere  nervous  affec- 
tions controllable  by  will  power.  Jesus,  possessing  great 
personal  magnetism,  wrought  these  apparently  miracu- 
lous cures.  Ans.  Mythical  theory  here  is  inconsistent; 
aiming  to  prove  the  gospels  myths,  it  admits  that  narra- 
tive of  these  cures  relates  actual,  historical  events,  hence 
becomes  Naturalistic.  Dogmatic  theory  of  Baur.  Vic- 
tory of  Christ  over  heathenism  set  forth  under  this  sym- 
bolic form.  Accommodation  Theory.  Spinoza  :  Christ, 
though  not  sharing  popular  superstitions,  accommodated 
himself  to  them,  by  acting  as  though  the  cases  of  possess- 
ion were  real,  while  he  knew  they  were  only  apparent. 
Christ's  literal  words  are  parabolic.  Ans:  a,  This  view 
irreconcilable  with  Christ's  character,  as  portra^-ed  by 
those  who  hold  it.  It  charges  liim  with  conscious  decep- 
tion, b,  Christ's  language  is  not  hypothetical,  but  explicit. 
Separate  personality  of  demons  is  evident,  for  Christ 
distinguishes  demon  from  person  possessed,  addresses 
them,  they  answer,  when  cast  out  man  becomes  as  other 
men,  they  enter  herd  of  swine,  &c.  (Vide.  Ebrard,  p.  251, 
Farrar,  I.,  p.  236,  note.) 

Christ  silenced  {(fi/uod/^u^he  muzzled)  demon's  testi- 
mony (Lk.  4  :  34,  35)  because,  a,  He  would  not  accept 
testimony  of  such  a  witness.  6,  To  permit  such  a  title, 
"Holy  One  of  God,"  at  this  ^tage  of  his  work  would 
have  precipitated  Pharisaic  hostility.  Prominent  features 
of  dispossession  :   loud  voice,  crying,  bodily  prostration. 


84 

Etfect :  Christ's  authority  estahlislied;  his  fame  spread 
abroad;  attention  attracted  to  iiis  preaching.  (Mark  1  : 
27-28. 

§31.  Matt.  8  :  14-17  ;  Mk.  1 :  29-34  ;  Luke  4  :  38-41. 
Peter's  Wife's  Mother.  This  miracle  wrought  same  day 
as  preceding.  Mt.'s  plan  being  topical,  not  chronolog'l, 
tliis  is  grouped  with  other  miracles  in  ch.  8.  Disease, 
great  "fever,"  Ttopt-y^  /isyd/.uj  being  medical  phrase,  it  has 
been  inferred  Luke  was  physician,  and  had  personal 
knowledge  of  tlie  case.  Fever  probably  signifies  general 
disability  of  sinner  joined  witli  burning  restlessne.-^s  of 
sinful  desires.  Mode  of  cure  :  Christ  stood  over  her  (Lk.), 
took  her  hand,  lifted  her  up  (Mk.)  and  rebuked  the  fever 
(Lk.)  Note  completeness  of  cure;  no  weakness,  nor 
gradual  convalescence,  but  "  immediately  she  arose  and 
ministered  unto  them."     (Trench  on  Mir.,  p.  192.) 

Sceptics  argue  from  "  rebuked  fever,"  either  possession 
is  ordinary  disease,  or  fever  is  possession.  Ans  :  Use  of 
figurative  language  is  overlooked.  This  is  an  isolated 
case — fever  personified  ;  it  does  not  answer  or  cry  out. 
Comp.  Christ's  command  to  winds,  "  Peace,  be  still." 

This  is  first  time  Peter  is  distinguished  above  the  other 
apostles;  miracle  worked  in  his  own  family.  Compare 
''wife's  mother,"  Mk.  1 :  30  and  1  Cor.  9 :  5.  Mk.  1  :  32, 
33,  says  at  sunset,  whole  city  brought  sick  to  Christ. 
Some  say,  waited  until  evening,  because  unlawful  to  heal 
on  Sabbath,  but  that  objection  not  yet  raised.  Observe 
that  it  is  first  proposed  by  Pharisaic  emissaries  from  Je- 
rus'm.  True  explanation,  cool  of  evening  proper  time 
to  move  the  sick.  This  Sabbath  a  specimen  day.  Crowds 
seek  him  next  morning.  Note  "  all  that  were  diseased," 
contrasted  with  "them  possessed  with  devils,"  Mk.  1  :  32. 
Hence  possession  differs  from  ordinary  disease. 

§32.  Mk.  1 :  35-39  ;  Lk.  4  :  42-44  ;  Mt.  4  :  23-25.  First 
Circuit  in  Galilee.  Mk.  1:  38,  39,  contains  Christ's  first 
intimation  of  future  plan  of  labor.  Taken  in  connection 
with  disciples'  statement  v.  37,  it  teaches  his  work  was 
not  stationary.  Cap.  being  selected  merely  as  headquar- 
ters. It  is  conjectured  tins  circuit  very  brief,  but  a  week, 
a  single  miracle  being  recorded.  Christ's  work  itinerant 
and  thorough  (Mk.  1  :  39,  *'  synagogues  in  all  Galilee"), 
Christ's  method,  teaching  in  synagogues  ;    his  doctrine, 


85 

"  kingdom  of  God,"  "gospel  of  the  kingdom."  Note 
Christ's  habit  of  private  devotion,  Mk.  1  :  35. 

§38.  Mt.  8:2-4:  Mk.  1  :  40-45;  Lk.  5:  12-16.  Heal- 
ing Leper.  Ebrard,  Trench,  Lange,  follow  Mt.'s  order; 
Robinson,  Lk's,  who  more  carefully  observes  chronolog. 
sequence.  Ten  lepers  only  recorded  cure  of  this  disease 
Lk.  17  :  12).  These  two  instances  are  onlv  specimens, 
Comp.  Mt.  10  :  8  ;  11:5;  Lk.  4  :  27  ;  Lk.  7  :  22.  Jose- 
phus  noies  current  shmder  that  Jews  driven  from  Egypt 
because  of  leprosy.  Two  kinds  of  leprosy,  a.  Elephan- 
tiasis. (Job).  6.  WhiteLeproys,  kind  mentionedin  Leviti- 
cus and  gospels.  Ceremonial  law.  Lev.  13.  Sufferer 
clothed  in  moui-ning,  with  head  bare  and  gar  lients  rent. 
When  pronounced  clean,  ceremonies  occupying  a  week 
were  requisite  and  all  classes  of  sacritice.  Import  of 
these  requirements.  Two  views.  1.  Michaelis  and 
Rationalistic  School  say  were  civil  acts  to  prevent  spread 
of  contagion,  and  for  social  protection.  Ans  :  «.  Dis- 
ease was  hereditary,  but  probably  not  contagious,  e.  g., 
Naarnan,  general  of  Syrian  army.  (2  Kings  5  :  1).  Ge- 
hazi  conversed  witli  king  of  Israel  (2  Kings  8  :  5). 
(Trench  on  Mir.  p.  174).  h.  This  view  does  not  account 
for  the  religious  rites,  or  sense  of  moral  impurity  attach- 
ing to  this  disease. 

2.  True  view.  Leprosy  selected  as  most  appropriate 
type  of  nature  of  sin  ;  hereditary,  spreading  from  single 
spot  over  entire  body,  incurable  by  human  agencies, 
loathsome.  Lepers  were  thought  smitten  by  God. 
Hence  Vulg.  renders  Is.  53:  4  ''quasi  leprosum"  giving 
rise  to  idea  that  Christ  was  to  be  a  leper.  (Farrar  VoL 
I.  p.  149).  So  Talmud  and  early  church,  hence  disease 
an  honor. 

Christ  healing  leprosy  typified  his  ability  to  save  from 
sin.  Symbolic  nature  of  this  disease  is  seen  in  form  of 
leper's  request,  to  be  cleansed,  not  healed  and  in,  Christ's 
answer  "  Be  thou  clean."  Christ  touched  the  leper, 
although  contrary  to  Mosaic  law.  Lev.  13  :  24-46  ; 
Num.  5  :  2.  Shewing  that  in  his  saving  work  he  shrinks 
from  no  man  howeve^- polluted.  (Farrar  Vol.  I.  p.  275). 
Leper  commanded  to  shew  himself  to  priests  (Lev. 
14:  4).  a.  To  gain  official  recognition  of  cure.  6.  To 
exhibit  his  relation   to  the  law,    "Christ  enjoins  secresy 


S6 

(Mk.  1  :  44).  Objection— cure  wrought  in  presence  of 
multitudes,  hence  secresy  inipos.-ihle.  Lange,  Farrar, 
Andrews,  cure  wrought  in  presence  of  but  few.  Grotius, 
Bengel,  Alexander,  injunction  limited  to  time  between 
cure  and  shewing  himself  to  priests.  (Trench  on  jMir.  p. 
180).  Better  opinion  :  Christ  intended  to  repress  fanati- 
cal enthusiasm,  which  would  hinder  his  work.  He  would 
subordinate  works  to  word.  He  would  not  attract  peo- 
ple as  mere  miracle- worker,  but  as  Saviour.  (Andrews 
p.  235.  Farrar  Vol.  I.  277).  Man  disobeying  and  spread- 
ing report,  (Mk.  1  :  45).  Christ  was  forced  to  avoid  all 
centres  of  pojtulation  because  of  undue  popular  zeal. 
Supposition  that  Christ's  retirement  was  caused  by  cere- 
monial uncleanness,  is  fanciful.  Naturalistic  view. 
Schenkel.  Leprosy  could  not  be  healed  by  will  power; 
hence  man  was  nearly  well,  Christ  observing  this,  simply 
announced  it. 

§34.  Opposition.  Mk.  2  : 1-12 ;  Lk.  5 :  17-26  ;  Mt.  19  : 
2-8.  Healing  Paralytic  on  Christ's  return  to  Cap'm  after 
Gal.  circuit.  Read  Mt.  9  :  1  as  conclusion  of  ch.  8  and 
follow  Mk.'s  order.  Mt.  grouping  miracles  places  this 
as  though  wrought  upon  Christ's  return  from  country  of 
Gergesenes. 

This  class  of  diseases  exhibits  the  helplessness  of  sin- 
ner. In  healing  them  Christ  always  commands  patient 
to  move  the  part  paralyzed,  thus  setting  forth  nature  and 
power  of  true  f\utli.  Christ's  command  "  Be  clean,"  in 
last  miracle,  emphasizes  pollution  of  sin,  "arise  and  walk," 
its  power.  Mk.  2  :  1,  iv  w;f(y>,  "at  home,"  not  "in  the 
house."  Observe  new  step  in  teaching,  by  miracles. 
Christ  addresses  man,  "  Thy  sins  be  (correctly,  hare  been., 
dipiiovTul,  Doy'u-.  perf  pass.,  not  subj.)  forgiven  thee,"  thus 
directing  attention  away  from  mei-e  external  result  to  its 
spiritual  signification. 

Some  falsely  infer  from  Christ's  address  that  the  palsy 
was  due  to  sinful  indulgence,  or  that  Christ  accommo- 
dates hiuiself  to  idea  that  all  suffering  was  direct  punish- 
ment of  specific  sin.  Scribes  and  Pharisees  secretly 
charge  Christ  with  blasphemy.  They  were  right  in 
supposing  God  alone  could  forgive  sins,  wrong  in  not 
accepting  proofs  of  Christ's  divinity. 

Emphasis  of  Christ's  rei)ly  (Lk.  5  :  23)  rests  on  "  .w//" 
i.  e.  claim  to  be  able.     The  former  claim  any  one  might 


87 

make,  the  latter  is  more  difficult  of  proof.  At  Christ's 
word  the  man  is  healed.  People  are  astonished  and 
o^lorify  God.  v.  24.  Revelation  of  conscious  divinity. 
New  element:  Pharisaic  opposition.  While  people  wel- 
come Christ  with  enthusiasm  Pharisees,  for  first  time, 
raise  opposition  in  Gal.  This  opposition  was  due  to 
influence  of  Pharisees  at  Jerus.  and  though  not  oflicially 
sanctioned  by  them,  shows  they  were  carefully  watching 
Christ's  movements. 

§35.  Mt.  9:9;  Mk.  2 :  13,  14  ;  Lk.  5  :  27,  28.  Call  of 
31atthew.  Call  of  Mt.  to  be  Christ's  apostle  is  related  to 
development  of  Pharisaical  opposition,  in  the  fact,  Mt. 
was  publican  and  specially  obnoxious  to  this  sect  (An- 
drews p.  238.)  The  feast  of  Levi  (Mt.)  did  not  occur  at 
this  time  because  1.  Twelve  were  with  Christ  at  feast,  at 
call  Mt.  All  not  yet  chosen.  2.  Feast  interrupted  by 
message  of  Jairus.  Raising  of  Jairus'  daughter  occurred 
subsequent  to  Christ's  retuiMi  from  Gadara,  Mt.'s  call 
previous  to  tliis.  3.  Breach  with  Pharisees  too  marked 
for  this  early  period. 

Mk.  and  Lk.  relate  under  exactly  similar  circumstances, 
call  of  Levi,  yet  in  their  lists  of  apostles  mention  no 
Levi,  but  Matthew.  Levi  was  prt»bably  original  name, 
changed  upon  becoming  apostle.  Comp.  Simon  changed 
to    C'ephas.     (John    1  :  42.)     Matthew—'  gift    of  God.'_ 

Publican  hateful  to  Jews,  being  constant  reminder  of 
Roman  domination,  and  taking  advantage  of  his  position 
to  practice  great  extortion.  Humility  of  Mt.  seen  in 
fact,  lie  alone  records  his  name  as  "  the  publican."  Mt. 
10  :  3.  (Farrar,  Vol.  I,  p.  245.)  For  sceptical  inferences, 
vide.  Ebrard,  p.  265.  - 

§36.  John  5:  1-47.  Second  Passorer.  Galilean  work 
is  here  interrupted  by  a  brief  visit  to  Jerus.  to  attend 
feast.  Hostility  of  Pharisees  compels  Christ's  speedy 
return  to  Gal.  not  going  again  to  Jerus.  for  eighteen 
months. 

Reasons  for  inserting  John  5,  here.  1.  Lk.  §37  gives 
note  of  time  viz.  <T«;9^?az-<t>  [^otoTSfUTrpcozco'].  Text  here  is 
doubtful,  interpretation  uncertain,  the  adjective  never 
occuring  elsewhere.  Wieseler  suggests  the  reference  is 
to  "  first  Sabbath  in  the  second  of  the  cycle  of  seven  years, 
which  completed  the  sabbatical  period."  Wetsteiu,  "  the 
first  sabbath  of  the  second  month.*" 


88 

Andrews  explains  with  reference  to  annual  feasts. 
First  Sabbath  after  Passover  wn^  firsf.  first  Sabbath  ;  first 
after  Pentecost  was  second — first  Sabbath  ;  first  after 
Tabernacles  was  third — first  Sabbath  :  Comp.  modern 
usage — first  Sunday  after  Epiphany,  first  after  Easter, 
first  after  Trinity,  &c.     (Andrews,  p.  241.) 

Scaliger.  Ewald,  Keini,  Robinson,  etc.  suppose  this 
sabbath  to  be  the  first  after  the  second  day  of  Passover, 
from  which  the  fift}^  days  to  Pentecost  were  counted  ; 
the  Sabbaths  of  this  interval  heino;  numbered,  the  first 
Sabbath  after  second  day,  third  Sabbath  after  second  day, 
etc.     (Andrews  p.  240.'   Lightfoot  on  Mt.  12:  1.) 

Last  view  is  to  be  preferred,  it  beino;  the  only  explana- 
tion appealino;  to  popular  usage;  likely  that  such  a  term 
would  be  current  with  the  masses.  2.  Agrees  best  with 
season  of  year.  Standing  corn  ripe  enouo:h  to  be  pluck- 
ed and  eaten.  This  could  not  be  before  Passover,  being 
the  time  for  oft'ering  first  fruits.  3.  Results  obtained. 
The  occurrences  of  this  feast,  if  introduced  here,  harmo- 
nize precisely  with  Syn.  narrative.  The  agreement 
amounts  almost  to-demonstration.  A  connected  account 
of  the  development  of  Pharisaic  opposition,  is  furnished, 
three  successive  instances  being  noted,  viz,  its  outbreak, 
at  the  healing  of  paralytic,  §34,  its  growth  at  Christ's 
call  of  the  publican,  §35,  its  increasing  definiteness  at 
Passover,  §36.  At  the  feast  of  John  5:1,  for  the  first 
time,  Christ  is  charged  with  Sabbath  breaking.  In  the 
Syn.  narrative  tlie  same  charge  is  taken  up  and  pressed  by 
his  enemies  in  Gal.  The  inference  is  unavoidable,  that 
John  5  should  be  inserted  here.  The  supposition  that 
at  this  time  Christ  Avent  up  to  the  Passover  and  was 
there  openly  charged  with  being  a  Sabbath-breaker,  by 
the  Jews,  Pharisees,  the  highest  religious  authorities, 
gives  the  best  and  only  adequate  explanation  of  the  in- 
troduction at  this  point  by  the  Syn.  of  the  same  charge, 
as  preferred  against  him  by  the  Pharisees  of  Gal.  Christ 
had  previously  wrought  many  cures  in  Gal.  on  Sabbath, 
and  even  in  the  Synagogues,  without  Pharisees  making 
slightest  opposition,  but  their  bitter  persecution  of  him 
on  this  ground,  henceforward,  admits  of  easy  explanation, 
when  we  find  from  John  5,  that  Jerus.  Pharisees  attempt 
to  kill  him  because  of  a  Sabbath  cure.     4.   Gal.  ministry 


89 

began  after  John  4.  Where  can  John  5,  be  inserted? 
This  the  only  place. 

Site  of'Bethesaida  cannot  be  accurately  determined.  It 
was  near  Sheep  Gate  (i.  e,  market),  which  was  toward 
the  I^.  E.  of  the  city.  Robinson  identifies  with  small 
intermittentspringcalled  fount  of  the  Virgin.  Objected  to, 
as  not  large  enough  for  the  five  porches,  and  multitude 
of  "  sick  folk." 

Weight  of  authority  rejects  v.  3  (latter  clause)  and 
whole  of  v.  4.  Wanting  in,  B,  D,  and  Sinaitic.  Inter- 
nal arguments  against  its  genuineness  are,  1.  Never 
alluded  to  elsewhere.  If  such  s[tring  existed,  its  fame 
would  be  world  wide.  2.  Wholly  out  of  analog}^  with 
miracles  of  O.  and  N.  T.  No  spiritual  truth  is  connected 
with  it,  to  be  believed  or  attested.  Angelic  agencj'  never 
recorded  as  working  miracles  elsewhere.  i^Farrar  Vol. 
I.  ]>.  372.  Note.)  In  favor  Text  Rec|>t,  Owen  on  John, 
in  loco.     Reference  to  angel  is  variously  interpreted. 

1.  Literal.  The  text  accepted  with  all  its  dithculties, 
on  ground,  that  narrative  is  not 'mpossible.  2.  Natural- 
istic. Ilengstenberg,  Robinson.  Sining  simply  medici- 
nal, its  properties  due  to  angelic  agency,  but  the  cure  not 
always  immediate,  nor  all  cured. 

3.  Allegorical.  Take  ayyuo^  in  etymological  sense, 
"  messenger,"  then  spring  is  spoken  of  figui-ativcly  as 
God's  messenger.  4.  Best.  Reject  the  doubtful  verses, 
and  the  difficult}^  vanishes  with  them. 

Sabbath  observance  was  test  question.  By  it  the  Jews 
were  distiuguislied  from  Gentile  nations.  It  was  the 
chief  mark  of  their  national  and  theocratic  fidelity.  At 
time  of  Christ  the  ascendancy  of  mere  ritual  was  such, 
tliat  its  spiritual  observance  was  scarcely  known.  Innu- 
merable, minute  and  absurd  regulations,  had  taken  the 
place  t)f  tlie  Mosaic  law.  It  was  with  this  dead  formality, 
that  Christ  came  constantly  into  conflict,  and  on  account 
of  it  was  so  repeatediv  charged  with  Sabbath  breaking. 
(Farrar  Vol.  I.  p.  430;§5).  vv.  16-18.  Jews  "  sought  to 
slay  him."  Many  regard  this  as  olficjial  sentence  of  San- 
hedrim, and  Christ's  discourse  (v.  19-47)  a  defence  de- 
livered before  them.  No  evidence  that  this  was  the  case; 
the  murderous  purpose  to  kill  Christ  is  now  found,  a 
pretext  on  which  to  base  it  is  obtained,  but  the  formal 
decree  to  slay  him  is  made  some  i:nontlis  later. 


90 

Christ'vS  discourse  contains  clear  and  profound  state- 
ment of  his  relations  to  the  Father.  In  Syn.  he  presents 
on]}' popular  arguments.  Lessons  of  tlie  discourse:  1, 
God  works  ceaselessly.  Sabbath  commemorates  rest 
from  creation  not  cessation  tVom  all  work.  2.  Christ's 
work  identical  with  God's,  not  mere  imitation,  and  is 
based  upon  his  immediate  perfect  knowledge  of  the 
Father.  3.  Christ  the  source  of  life,  and  the  judge  of 
all.  Resurrection  and  judgment  referred  to.  Eternal 
generation  taught.  4.  Necessity  and  responsibility  of 
exercising  faith  in  himself;  rejecting  him  is  to  reject 
God.  Rage  of  Jews  aroused  because  he  claimed  God  as 
his  Father,  "  making  himself  equal  with  God."  The 
Pharisees,  therefore,  understood  Christ  as  claiming 
divinity. 

Strauss  alleges  discrepancy  in  the  gospel  narrative  of 
the  development  of  opposition  to  Christ  on  the  ground, 
that  Syn.  make  its  growth  gradual,  occasioned  by  Sab- 
bath-breaking, while  John  traces  it  to  Christ's  teaching 
concerning  Ijis  person,  causing  sudden  outbreak. 

Ans:  This  discrepancy  much  exaggerated.  All  four 
evangelists  make  the  origin  of  organized  opposition,  Sab- 
bath-breaking. All  ditference  in  their  accounts  of  its 
development  is  due  to  the  characteristic  dilierence  of 
Christ's  ministry  in  Judea  and  Gal.  Tn  Judea  his  great 
design  was  to  manifest  himself  plainly  to  Jews  as  Mes- 
siah :  in  Gal.  to  instruct  believers  who  should  organize 
the  church;  in  Judea  he  had  to  deal  with  the  rulers,  his 
enemies  :  in  Gal.  with  the  people  who  heard  him  gladly. 

Christ's  allusion  to  John  Bap.'s  testimony  as  already 
past  (v.  35)  strengthens  the  view  that  Gal.  ministry  began 
previous  to  John  5. 

§37.  Mt.  12  :  1-8  ;  Mk.  2  :  23-28  ;  Lk.  6  :  1-5.^  Phick- 
Ing  Corn  on  the  Sabbath.  This  incident  occurred  first  Sab- 
bath after  Passover,  while  Christ  was  travelling,  either 
to  visit  different  synagogues,  or  more  likely,  hastening 
from  Jerus.  back  to  Gal.  to  escape  impending  persecution. 

Conduct  of  Pharisees  now  changes.  Hitherto  their 
hostility  had  been  secret,  henceforward  their  emissaries 
follow  Christ,  striving  to  harass  him,  and  destroy  his  in- 
fluence. Plucking  the  corn  was  sanctioned  by  Mosaic 
law  (Deut.  23  :  25.)     Christ  replies  to  the  charges  of  the 


91 

Pharisees  with  five  argnments.  1.  David's  eating  shew 
bread.  (I.  Sam.  21 :  1-7.)  Point  of  comi)arison  between 
this  case  and  Christ's  is  the  breaking  of  hiw.  Law  of 
Sabbath  and  law  of  sanctnary  derived  their  anthorit}' 
not  from  their  essential  holiness  but  from  God  alone,  and 
if  in  certain  circumstances  it  was  just  for  a  man  to  break 
the  one,  why  might  it  not  be  lawful  to  break  the  other. 
2.  Law  itself  required  of  the  priests  more  arduous  toil 
on  Sabbath  than  on  other  days,  in  performing  temple 
services. 

3.  Hos.  G  :  Q.  "I  desire  mercy,  not  sacrifice."  The 
design  of  the  law  was  blessing;  by  their  formality 
Pharisees  had  iTiade  it  a  curse.  4.  Sabbath  designed  for 
man.  Analogous  to  3d.  Sabbath  instituted  for  man's 
good,  and  not  to  be  so  burdened  with  observances  that 
his  higher  interests  become  subordinate  to  them.  5. 
Christ'b  supreme  authority  ;  "  Son  of  man,  Lord  of  Sab- 
bath" ;  Sabbath  law  could  be  altered  by  him  with  same 
authority  as  by  God.  Observe  supplemental  character 
of  gospels  :  of  these  five  arguments,  but  two  are  common 
to  all  the  evangelists.  Note  increasing  self-revelation  of 
Christ  recorded  by  Syn.  ;  he  is  greater  tlian  temple  ;  has 
authority  over  law  equal  to  God.  Thus  Syn.  and  John 
dift'er,  not  as  to  Christ's  personal  consciousness  of  Mes- 
siahshij),  but  merely  as  to  his  mode  of  manifesting  it. 

§38.  Mt.  12  :  9-11  •  Mk.  3  : 1-6 ;  Lk.  6  :  6-11.  maling 
inithcred  hand  on  Sabbath.  Occurred  after  Christ's  return 
to  Galilee.  Mk.  uses  definite  article,  'Hhe  synagogue," 
probably  the  one  in  Cap.  Wieseler's  chronological 
scheme  giving  him  too  many  Sabbaths,  for  this  month, 
iie  makes  this  Sabbath  and  the  preceding,  consecutive 
days,  one  the  weekly  Sab.  the  other  a  feast  Sab.  Phari- 
sees watch  Christ  to  find  pretext  for  persecuting  him. 
Christs  asks  them  "  Is  it  hiwful  to  do  good  on  the  Sab- 
bath-days or  to  do  evil  ?  to  save  life  or  to  kill  ?"  Some 
say  this  question  is  unfair;  the  Pharisees  never  held  it 
was  right  to  do  wrong.  Ans.  Christ  takes  extreme  case. 
Their  forbidding  attendance  on  sick  oii  Sabbath  day,  in- 
volved serious  responsibility,  possibly  loss  of  life.  Not 
to  do  good  was  to  do  evil.  Christ  had  also  in  view  their 
purpose  to  kill  him,  hence  uses  this  ad  hominein  argu- 
ment: He  intended  to  relieve  sufiering,  they  were  con- 


92 

spiring  to  murder  hi  in  ;  which  kept  Sabbath  better  ?  He 
also  argues  iVorn  their  practice.  Tiiey  would  never  hesi- 
tate to  pull  a  sheep  out  of  a  pit  on  Sabbath,  yet  forbade 
healing  a  crippled  man.  Talmud  now  forbids  such  help 
to  animals,  but  the  injunction  was  perhaps  occasioned 
by  Christ's  argument,  as  there  was  nothiiig  of  the  kind 
in  force  then.  Effect  of  this  miracle  was  not  as  formerly, 
to  excite  admiration  of  all,  but  tilled  Pharisees  with  rage 
and  led  them  to  counsel  with  Herodians  against  Christ. 

Herodians.  1,  Westcott's  view.  (Smith'sDict.  p.  1054.) 
Those  who  saw^  in  the  Herods  a  protection  against  direct 
heathen  rule,  and  those  who  looked  with  satisfaction 
upon  sucli  a  compromise  between  the  ancient  faith  and 
heathen  civilization  as  Herod  the  Great  and  his  succes- 
sors aimed  at,  as  the  true  and  highest  consummation  of 
Jewish  hopes.  2.  Common  view.  Herods  mere  tools 
of  Roman  gov't,  and  the  Herodians  mere  sycophants, 
favoring  Roman  rule.  Their  union  with  Pharisees, 
politically  their  opponents,  is  a  great  step  in  the  opposi- 
tion organizing  against  Christ. 

§39.  Mt.  12?  15-21;  Mk.  3:7-12.  Success.  Christ's 
popularity,  despite  increasing  opposition  grew  so  greatly, 
that  multitudes  follow  him  from  all  parts  of  the  country. 
Gal.,  Judea,  Idumea,  beyond  Jordan,  Tyre  and  Sidon. 
So  great  are  the  crowds,  he  is  forced  to  enter  a  boat 
"  lest  they  should  throng  him."  Multitudes  typify  final 
success  of  the  gospel  and  were  fulfillment  of  Is.  11 :  10; 
42:  1,  which  predict  the  Gentiles  as  sharers  in  Messianic 
blessings. 

The  first  stage  of  development  of  opposition  is  now 
ended,  and  the  subject  of  teaching  becomes  prominent. 
The  people  having  been  aroused  and  drawn  to  him,  they 
are  prepared  to  hear  his  words. 

§40.  Organization.  Mt.  10  :  2-4;  Mk.  3  :  13-19; 
Lk.  6:12-19.  Appointment  of  ihe  Twdcc.  This  is  third 
step  in  organization,  first  at  Jordan,  second  at  Sea  of 
(jralilee.  Mk.  and  Lk.  clearly  connect  this,  with  Sermon 
on  .Mount;  Mt.,  however  joins  it  with  their  temporary 
mission.  Lk.  6  :  13.  Note,  different  classes  of  follow- 
ers distinguished,  disciples  in  general  and  apostles  chosen 
from  these.  Nature  of  office.  1.  To  be  with  him  as 
witnesses.     2.  To  preach.     3.  To   work  miracles.     Mk. 


93 

3  :  14,  15.  These  qualifications  preclude  the  permanency 
of  this  office.  In  gospels  name  apostle  occurs  but  nine 
times,  Mt,,  Mk.  and  John  once  each,  Lk.  six  times,  in 
Acts  more  than  thirty  times.  The\^  were  "  learners  " 
until  Pentecost,  after  that  fully  apostles.  Their  miracu- 
lous power  was  not  coequal  with  that  of  Christ  but  was 
limited  to  healing  sick,  raising  dead,  demoniacal  posses- 
sion. They  had  no  power  over  nature,  only  over  man, 
their  cures  being  illustrations  of  their  saving  work. 
Number  twelve,  significant  of  perfection  (Lange  on  Mt. 
in  loco.)  Comp.  12  sons  Jacob,  stones  of  Jordan,  High 
Priest's  breast-plate,  12  spies,  12  foundations  of  New 
Jerus.,  144,000,  [jerfection  perfected,  the  cliurch  in  heaven 
(Rev.)  There  are  four  lists  of  apostles;  three  in  gospels, 
one  in  Acts  1  :  13.  Each  contains  three  classes  of  four 
each.  Peter  heads  the  list.  Each  class  invariably  begins 
with  the  same  name.  Iscariot  is  always  last.  Lebbeus 
(Mt.,)  Thaddeus  (Mk.,)  and  Judas  the  brother  of  Jas. 
(Lk.)  are  commonly  considered  as  referring  to  same  per- 
son.    (Farrar  Vol.  I.,  p.  251.) 

§41.  Teaciiinu.  Mt.  5 :  1  to  8  :  1  ;  Lk.  G  :  20-49. 
Sermon  on  Jlount.  Contrast  in  point  of  simplicity,  pro- 
fundity, grasp  of  principles,  and  authority,  between 
Christ's  teaching  and  that  of  heathen  philosophers  or 
Jewish  scliools,  aftbrds  clear  proof  of  his  divinity.  Four 
forms  of  Christ's  teaching.  1.  Long  discourses  in  John 
relating  to  his  person.  2.  Long  discourses  in  8yn. 
concerning  kingdom  of  Heaven,  involving  his  person  and 
sacrifice.  Longest  are,  Sermon  on  Mt.,  and  denuncia- 
tions of  woe  against  Pharisees.  3.  Parables,  setting 
forth  the  nature  of  kingdom  of  heaven,  the  duties  and 
relations  of  its  individual  members.  4.  iShort  sayings,  pithy 
statements  often  repeated.  Self-testimony  of  Christy  in 
John,  is  contained  in  long  discourses  ;  in  Syn.  it  consists 
in  the  titles  he  assumes  (e.  g.  Son  of  David,  Son  of  Man, 
Son  of  God),  and  claims  which  he  makes,  (e.  g.  to  for- 
give sins,  to  rai-e  dead,  to  judge,  etc.)   . 

1.  Son  of  God.  Expressions  most  frequent  in  John. 
Theories.  '  a.  Lowest,  Pantheistic.  Strauss  and  Baur. 
Great  truth  of  Christ's  teaching  was  universal  fatherhood 
of  God,  as  contrasted  with  the  vindictive  Jehovah  of  O. 
T.     Christ's  conviction  of  God's  love  to  man  and  iiian's 


94 


dependence  upon  God,  raised  him  to  his  liigh  plane  of 
tlionght,  but  being  unacquainted  with  Pantheistic  phi- 
losophy, he  erred  in  conceiving  of  God  as  a  personal 
being.  As  most  vividly  apprehending  the  fatherhood  of 
God,  he  is  styled  son  of  God.  b.  Evvald.  By  this  title 
Christ  claimed  nothing  divine.  Only  higher,  purer, 
religious  union  with  God.  To  him  was  given  a  perfect 
divine  communication,  making  him  conscious  (1)  that 
there  was  to  be  a  perfected  rule  of  God  upon  the  earth, 
(2)  that  he  was  to  introduce  it  as  its  king.  c.  Orthodox 
view.     Christ,  Son  of  God,  by  eternal  generation. 

2.  Son  of  31an.  Expression  occurs  78  times  in  gospels, 
and  but  4  times  out  of  them.  Christ's  chosen  term  for 
himself.  It  is  applied  to  him  b}' others  but  twice.  Theo- 
ries, a.  At  first,  expressive  merely  of  essential  human- 
ity and  humiliation,  of  the  fiict  that  Christ's  sympathies 
unite  him  as  a  brother,  to  all  men. 

Change  occurs  toward  close  of  his  ministry  and  the 
title  is  used  as  containing  Messianic  force.  Comp.  Mt. 
24  :  30;  26:  64  with  Dan.  7  :  13,  14,  a  Messianic  predic- 
tion, b.  Title  denoted  Christ  was  ideal  man,  nothing 
superhuman.  Gess  remarks,  this  view  irreconcilable 
with  Christ's  constant  claims  of  divine  attributes,  c. 
Orthodox.  "  The  Son  of  Man,"  above  other  men,  dis- 
tinguished by  some  peculiarity,  wiiich  may  be  discovered 
by  considering  what  is  predicted  of  him,  viz.,  divine 
honors,  jtrerogatives,  etc. 

Why  does  Christ  employ  this  title  ?  1.  Ans  :  Iiicorputo 
to  hide  his  real  divine  nature  till  men  should  be  prepared 
to  accept  him.  So  Ewald,  Bleek.  2.  A  mere  circumlo- 
cution for  Jesus,  with  which  it  is  interchanged.  3.  Used 
to  set  forth  Christ's  Messiahship.  The  title  "  Messiuh" 
could  not  be  employed  because  of  the  false  ideas  of  the 
people  respecting  it.  Had  he  assumed  this  title  men 
would  have  expected  him  to  fulfill  their  wrong  concep- 
tions. Jesus  would  not  be  called  Christ  until  late  in  his 
life.  Only  once  did  he  call  himself  "the  Christ;"  and 
that  was  at  his  trial  and  led  to  his  condemnation.  The 
title  evidently  contains  the  two  ideas  of  exaltation  and 
humiliation.  After  tlie  Resurrection  it  was  not  used  by 
the  disciples.  It  is  evidently  based  on  Ps.  8,  and  Dan. 
7  :  13,  14.  Gess  sees  a  reference  to  tiie  Protevangelium, 
Gen.  3:15. 


95 

The  expressions  '' kiiigdorn  of  heaven,"  "  kingdom  of 
God,"  should  also  be  noticed.  "  Kingdom  of  God  "  is 
employed  by  Mk.,  Lk.  and  John.  MaU.  nsed  the  i)hrase 
but  twice.  His  expression  is  Kingdom  of  Heaven  [zoju 
ouf/aviov,  plur.,  Heb.  forni,  alluding  to  different  spheres.) 
Some  regard  the  two  expressions  as  identical.  Heaven 
is  put  for  God  as  being  the  place  of  his  dwelling.  This, 
however,  does  not  explain  Matt.'s  exclusive  use  of  one. 
Others,  therefore,  say  the  phrase  "  kingdom  of  heaven  " 
is  used  by  Matt,  to  contrast  the  new  stage  of  God's  rule 
with  that  of  O.  T.  theocracy,  i.  e.  gospel  is  heavenly  ful- 
fillment of  God's  rule  on  earth.  "Kingdom  of  God"  is 
equally  ai)plicable  to  both  dispensations.  The  same 
essential  idea  is,  however,  involved  in  both.  Diff.  views 
held  as  to  what  Christ  intended  to  do  in  establishing  "the 
kingdom"  :  1.  Infidel.  Christ  attempted  to  establish  an 
earthly  kingdom,  to  free  the  Jews,  but  perished  in  the 
attempt.  2.  Rationalistic,  a,  He  aimed  at  political 
regeneration.  Seeing  that  social  reform  was  necessarj- 
to  this,  he  became  a  moralist,  6,  Christ  at  first  held  the 
same  view  as  Pharisees.  Gradually  his  mistaken  ideas 
were  corrected,  and  he  sought  to  carry  on  a  spiritual 
work.  Renan  :  Christ  vacillates  between  these  two  views 
of  his  work,  the  Pharisaic  and  Spiritual.  3.  Accommo- 
dation--Schleiermacher,  Schenkel :  The  aim  which  Christ 
had  in  his  mind  was  simply  to  found  as  a  teacher  a  moral, 
spiritual  system.  He  however  accommodated  himself  in 
his  instructions  to  the  popular  misconceptions  of  the 
people  with  regard  to  the  theocracy.  Either  he,  like  the 
people,  was  blinded  by  misunderstanding,  or  he  made 
use  of  their  false  notions  to  elevate  them. 

Sfrmon  on  the  Mount.  Christ  now  gives  a  fuller  and 
more  orderly  arranged  specimen  of  his  teaching  than  he 
had  previously  afl^brded  the  people.  The  time  has  now 
come  for  a  more  complete  revelation,  that  friends  and 
foes  may  be  separated  and  the  gospel  system  somewhat 
consolidated.  Place.  According  to  tradition  the  Mt.  of 
Beatitudes,  a  lime-stone  ridge  7  or  8  m.  S.  W.  of  Cap'm, 
called  Kurn  Hattin  on  account  of  its  two  peaks.  To  this 
identification  Robinson  objects  that  the  Mt.  is  too  far 
distant  from  Gap'm  to  be  consistent  with  Matt.  8  :  5  and 
Lk.  7  :  1.    The  tradition,  also,  is  oyly  in  the  Latin  church 


96 

and  from  the  13th  century.  Matt.  Jincl  Lk.  differ.  As 
to  place,,  Mt.  says,  "went  up  into  a  mountain  and  sat;" 
Lk.,  ''came  down  and  stood  in  the  phiin."  Mt.  however 
uses  TO  opo^  in  a  wide  sense— a  mountain  district.  Christ 
'•went  up  to  pray,"  (Lk.  6  :  12)  and  came  down,  i.  e.  part 
way,  to  the  level  plain  hetween  the  two  peaks,  and  taui^lit. 
As  to  time,  Mt.  places  it  at  commencement  of  Gal.  min- 
istry; Lk.  puts  it  some  nmnths  later  in  connection  with 
the  call  of  the  Twelve.  The  miracle  followine^  in  Mt.  is 
healing  of  leper  ;  in  Lk.,  healing  of  centurion's  servant. 
In  letigth,  Mt,  gives  107  verses  ;  Lk.  but  30.  The  accounts 
resemble  one  another  in  the  facts  that  both  are  mountain 
sermons  occurring  early  in  Gal.  ministry;  that  the  begin- 
ning and  close  are  alike  in  both,  and  the  drift  of  thought 
is  tlie  same.  Theories  of  the  relation  hctioeen  the  two.  1. 
Two  accounts  of  the  same  sermon,  blurred  and  distorted 
by  tradition.  Some  follow  Mt.  as  most  complete,  others 
Luke  as  presenting  fewest  difHculties.  2.  Conscious 
selection  lies  at  base  of  differences;  one  discourse  pur- 
poselj'  varied  by  Evangelists  ;  Lk.  omits  wliat  was  special 
to  Jews.  This  coincides  with  differences,  but  does  not 
offer  an  adecpiate  explanation.  3.  Couinio)).  (3ne  dis- 
course; Lk.'s  account  historical  as  Christ  gave  it;  Mt.'s 
an  amplilication  by  additions  grouped  fiom  other  dis- 
courses, analogous  to  Mt.'s  plan  in  parables.  A  specimen 
of  Christ's  teaching.  (K)jection  to  this  is  the  unity  of 
Mt.'s  account.  Calvin  and  Nearider  hold  that  both 
Mt.  and  Lk.  give  specimens  of  Christ's  teacliing.  4. 
Two  discourses  on  same  occasion,  the  one  esoteric 
(Mt.'s)  to  the  disciples,  the  other  exoteric  (Lk.'s)  to 
the  multitude.  (iSo  Augustine,  Lange).  Objections  : 
There  is  nothing  esoteric  in  Mt.  Christ  makes  no 
distinction  of  this  kind  in  his  teaching.  5.  Two  dis- 
tinct, yet  similar  discourses.  Christ  re[)eats  the  same 
truths  because  the  circumstances  and  the  wants  of 
the  people  were  the  same.  (So  Dr.  Alexander.)  The 
choice  lies  between  the  third  and  fifth  view.  At  all 
events,  Christ  gave  a  discourse  at  the  time  of  calling  the 
Twelve. 

Design  of  the  Sermon,  and  Connectum.  with  the  Histori/. 
The  design  of  the  discourse  was  to  show  the  nature  of  the 
Messiah's  kingdonj.     Christ  cai::e  preaching  a  kingdom 


97 

and  repentance.  Naturally  it  would  be  asked,  what  is 
this  repentance,  what  this  kingdom,  what  its  relations  to 
Pharisaic  ideas  and  to  O.  T.  economy  ?  There  was  need 
of  explanation,  that  the  people  might  know  to  what  they 
were  committing  themselves.  Christ  in  this  discourse 
gives  it,  removing  all  erroneous  views  and  false  inter- 
pretations of  his  work.  Some  have  mistakenly  thought 
that  Christ  here  sets  forth  a  system  of  theology,  others, 
a  system  of  Ethics.  The  sermon  was  related  to  Pharisaic 
errors  in  teaching  in  opposition  to  them  that  member- 
ship in  God's  kingdom  was  dependent  not  upon  external 
circumstances  but  upon  personal  character;  that  the  Law 
was  to  be  observed  not  in  a  formal  manner  but  in  its 
spirit.  Three  main  divisions  :  1.  Ch.  5  :  1-16,  character  of 
members  ;  characteristics  required,  spiritual.  2.  Ch.  5  : 
17-6.  Claims  of  kingdom,  a,  5 :  17-48,  moral  requisi- 
tions :  b.  ch.  6,  religious  requisites.  3.  Ch.  7,  exhortations 
to  true  life  ;  temptations  and  dangers,  how  avoided.  The 
effect  was  astonishment  (Mt.  7 :  29)  "  for  he  taught  them 
as  one  having  authority."  Sceptics  view  this  discourse 
as  genuine,  making  an  exception  in  its  favor.  They 
regard  Christ  as  teachingan  ethical  and  religious  system. 
The}^  draw  a  contrast  between  its  free  tone  and  the  later 
dogma  of  Paul  and  other  Apostles.  Hence  Christian 
dogma  was  a  late  invention.  Christ  taught  morals,  not 
doctrine.  Such  is  true  Christianity,  love  to  God  as  our 
Father,  to  our  brother-man  as  to  ourself  Ans :  1.  Dis- 
course was  not  intended  to  be  a  full  system,  but  adapted 
to  the  comprehension  of  the  people.  2.  Adapted  to  its 
position  in  history  of  redemption.  Revelation  corres- 
ponds to  the  period  in  'which  it  is  given.  3.  Completed 
Christian  doctrine  is  based,  on  life,  death  and  resurrection 
of  Christ,  hence  could  not  be  brought  forward  at  this 
stage.  4.  Unity  of  truth  is  always  preserved,  although 
it  is  more  definitely  stated  from  time  to  time.  O.  T.  and 
Christ's  teaching  involved  all  fundamental  doctrines. 
In  the  Epistles,  however,  they  assume  a  more  analytic 
form. 

That  the  discourse  is  Evangelical  not  Ethical,  as  Skep- 
tics assert,  is  seen  :  1.  Becaus'e  its  standard  of  spiritual- 
ity is  so  high  that  supernatural  aid  is  required.  Need 
of  forgiven"ess  is  shown.  Christ  n^ist  be  sought  and  this 
search  is  to  be  by  means. 


98 

2.  Righteousness  is  distingnished  from  moral  right 
because  it  is  connected  with  Christ's  kingdom.  His  per- 
son is  involved  in  bis  work.  His  disciples  are  spoken 
of  as  those  having  purity. 

The  discourse  was  an  evangelical  restatement  of  Law 
of  Moses,  and  a  preparation  for  the  gospel. 

H2.  Miracles.  Mt.  8:  5-13;  Lk.  7: 1-10.  Heaimg  Cen- 
turlon's  servant.  Capernaum.  §42,  43,  resume  the  subject 
of  miracles.  All  centurions  mentioned  in  '^.  T.  appear 
in  a  favorable  light.  Mt.  8  :  5,  he  loved  Jewish  nation 
and  built  a  synagogue.  Though  a  heatheji  Christ  de- 
clared of  him,  "  I  have  not  found  so  great  faith,  no  not 
in  Israel."  Comp.  centurion  at  crucifixion  (Mk.  15  :  39; 
Lk.  23:  47.),  Cornelius  (Act.  10:  1.),  Julius  (Acts  27 :  1.) 
(Smith's  Diet.  p.  406  )  Legion  contained  about  6000  in- 
fantry, with  a  varying  proportion  of  cavalry.  It  "  was 
subdivided  into  ten  "cohorts  ("band,"  Acts  10:1),  the 
cohort  into  three  maniples,  and  the  maniple  into  two 
centuries,  containing  original h^  100  men,  as  the  name 
implies,  but  subsequently  from  50  to  100  men,  according 
to  the  strength  of  the  legion."  (Smith's  Diet.  Army  p. 
162.)  Gal.  was  garrisoned  with  Roman  soldiery  ;  Her- 
od's bodyguards,  and  those  farming  imperial  revenues. 

New  features  in  this  miracle.  1.  Intercessor}'  faith. 
Master  prays  for  his  servant.  2.  Striking  greatness  of 
faith.  'As  his  servants  obeyed  his  word,  so  disease 
would  obey  the  word  of  Christ.'  3.  It  was  a  Gentile's 
faith.  This  is  first  recorded  instance  of  individual  heal- 
ing, outside  the  chosen  people,  hence  intercession  of 
Jewish  elders  is  sought.  (Lk!  7:  3.)  Christ  praises  this 
Gentile's  faith,  as  greater  than  any  in  Israel,  and  applies 
this  fact  by  declaring  '  Many  Gentiles  shall  be  called, 
many  children  of  the  kingdom  cast  ofi''  (Mt.  8:  11-12.) 
Objections.  1.  Mt.  says  centurion  came  in  person  to 
Christ :  Lk.  he  sent  through  the  elders,  then  through 
friends,  but  had  no  personal  interview.  Ans.  "  Qui 
faeit  per  alium,  facit  per  se."  "  What  one  does  by  his 
agent,  he  does  himself."  Mt.  dwells  on  mere  fact  of 
miracle  as  displaying  great  faith  ;  Lk.  goes  into  detail. 
(Robin.  Gk.  Harm.  p.  198.)  2.  Christ  lacks  either  sin- 
cerity or  foreknowledge.  He  starts  for  house,  but  does 
not  go  to  it  ;  either  did  not  intend  going   and   practiced 


99 

deception,  or  changed  his  mind,  because  ignorant  of  what 
he  was  about  to  do.  Ans.  This  assumes  Christ  was 
bound  to  disclose  all  his  intentions.  No  inconsistency 
in  Christ's  not  knowing  things  about  to  happen.  To 
his  human  consciousness  things  came  as  to  ours. 

§43.  Lk.  7:11-17.  Raising  son  of  widow  of  Nain.  lik. 
8 :  1-3,  narrates  a  second  general  circuit  of  Gal.  Some 
hold  this  refers  to  prospective  journey,  undertaken 
near  close  of  ministry.  .  Common  view  (Andrews,  Wiese- 
ler,)  the  reference  in  Lk.  is  retrospective,  summing  up 
the  events  narrated  in  §§  43-47.  Exegesis  favorsthis 
interpretation.  "  Nain,  the  modern  Nein  is  situated  on 
the  northwestern  edge  of  the  -  Little  Hermon,'  where  the 
ground  falls  into  the  plain  of  Esdraelon."  The  entrance 
must  always  have  been  up  the  steep  ascent  from  the 
plain,  and  here,  on  the  west  side  of  the  \illage,  the  rock 
is  full  of  sepulchral  caves.  (Smith's  Diet.  p.  2058.)  Christ 
approaches  i!^ain  attended  by  many  disciples,  and  much 
people.  Style  of  gospel  description  simple,  beautiful, 
impressive  "  only  son  of  his  mother,  and  she  was  awidou\'" 
This  was  only  time  Christ  was  ever  in  plain  of  Esdraelon. 

This  class  of  miracles  manifest  Christ's  power  over 
departed  spirits  and  attest  his  claim  to  l)e  source  of  life, 
physical  and  spiritual.  Three  cases  of  this  kind  are 
recorded,  each  exhibiting  more  striking  power  than  the 
preceding,  viz.,  Jairus'  daughter,  from  death  bed; 
Widow's  son,  from  the  bier;  Lazarus,  from  the  tomb. 
Chronological  order.  Widow's  son,  Jairus'  daughter, 
Laz.  Sceptical  theories  concerning  these  miracles.  1.  Natu- 
ralistic. Cases  of  susp.ended  animation  ;  death  otdy  ap- 
parent :  pretended  miracle,  only  resuscitation. 

2.  Mythical.  Mere  inventions  of  early  church  to  make 
Christ's  life  accord  with  0.  T.  prophecy,  and  type. 

Effect:  all  feared,  glorified  God,  saying  "Great 
Prophet  has  arisen,"  "  God  has  visited  Israel."  Christ's 
fame  spread  not  only  through  Judea,  but  through  whole 
"  region  round  about." 

§44.  Opposition.  Mt.  11 :  2-19 ;  Lk.  7  :  18-35.  3Ies- 
sage  of  John  Bap.  In  this  section  renewal  of  opposition  is 
occasioned  by  Bap's  disciples,  and  continues  to  §50.  Mt. 
places  this  narrative  after  sending  out  the  Twelve,  but 
this  is  too   late,  for  during  absence  of  Twelve,  John 


100 

was  beheaded  ;  Mk,  6  :  30  ;  Mt.  14  :  13.  Lk's  order  is 
tlierefore  best.  The  report  of"  Christ's  miracles  was  the 
occasion  of  Bap's  message.  John  was  imprisoned  at 
Machaerus,  "  on  the  borders  of  the  desert,  X.  of  Dead 
Sea,  on  frontiers  of  Arabia,"  "  identified  with  the  ruins 
M'Kauer."  Fathers  say  John  did  not  doubt  himself,  but 
sent  to  Christ  that  his  disciples  miglit  be  satisfied.  But 
that  Bap.  was,  at  least  to  some  extent,  staggered  and  per- 
plexed b}'  Christ's  method  of  developing  his  work,  is 
evident  from  fact  of  Christ's  answer  being  addressed  not 
to  disciples,  but  John  himself.  Message  expresses  im- 
patience mingled  with  distrust.  He  was  languishing  in 
prison,  multitudes  of  others  were  being  relieved  and 
blessed  hy  miracles;  he,  the  forerunner,  was  forgotten, 
''was  this  really  the  Christ,  or  should  they  look  for 
another?"  (Farrar  Vol.  L,  p.  289.)  Christ's  only  reply 
is  reference  to  his  miracles,  thus  showing  estimate  he  put 
upon  them  :  His  works  were  equivalent  to  assertion  of 
divinity.  John  Bap.  was  greatest  prophet  because  of  his 
position  as '' index-finger  of  O.  T." 

Christ  received  by  the  people,  but  Pharisees  and  law- 
yers doubted  (Lk.  7  :  29.) 

§45.  Mt.  11  :  20-30.  Upbraids  the  cities.  Disciples  of 
John  having  returned  to  him,  Christ  gives  his  estimate 
of  the  reception  he  had  met  in  Gal.  The  same,  or  a  simi- 
lar denunciation  of  woes  is  recorded  in  Lk.  10  :  13,  in 
connection  with  sending  out  seventy.  Exact  location  of 
these  cities  is  unknown  ;  probably  W.  shore  Sea  of  Gal. 
Their  rejection  of  Christ  contrasted  with  ancient  heathen 
opposition  to  theocracy,  viz..  Tyre  and  Sidon,  Sodom  and 
Gomorrah.  There  is  no  record  of  a  single  miracle, 
wrought  in  Bethsaida  or  Chorazin,  yet  the  Evangelist 
says  these  were  the  cities  "  wherein  most  of  his  mighty 
works  were  done." 

§46.  Lk.  7 :  3(5-50.  Anoiniiiu/  by  a  ironiaiK  This  took 
place  at  either  Cap.,  Nain,  Magdala.  It  difiers  from  the 
case  recorded  by  Mt.,  Mk.,  John  as  this  is  early  in  his 
ministry  ;  that,  in  last  week  of  his  life.  Romish  tradition 
considers  this  woman  the  Mary  Magdelene,  mentioned 
a  few  verses  later  (Lk.  8  :  2)  and  makes  her  the  repre- 
sentative of  penitent  frailty.  This  idea  is  based  wholly 
on   mere  juxta[)osition,  there  being  nothing  definite  to 


101 

show  that  these  are  necessarily  the  same  person,  or  that 
seven  devils  were  demons  of  impurity.  This  incident 
contrasts  with  Christ's  previous  treatment,  (§45,)  is  as- 
sociated with  new  instance  of  opposition,  and  gives  rise 
to  Christ's  tirst  parable  :"  the  two  debtors.  (Farrar  Vol. 
I.,  p.  296.) 

§47.  Lk.  8  :  1-3.  Second  circuit  in  Gal.  General  state- 
ment, summing  up  results  of  the  journey,  begun  §43, 
giving  Christ's  mode  of  living  and  travelling,  and  his 
household,  viz.  the  Twelve,  and  certain  women,  Mary  of 
Magdala  (W.  of  Cap.,)  Joanna  of  Herod's  household  etc. 
Connection  ;  Love  and  devotion  of  these  attendants  con- 
trasted with  rejection  and  opposition  of  Pharisees  and 
masses.     Chri>t  was  supported  bv  free-will  offerings. 

§48.  Mk.  3:  19-30;  Mt.  12:  "22-37;  Lk.  11:  14,  15, 
17-23.  Healing  blind  and  dumb  dernoniac.  Events  of  §§48- 
56  occur  during  a  single  day,  the  great  day  of  parables, 
which  opens  with  cure  of  demoniac.  Lk.  records  this 
cure  in  ch.  11.  during  period  of  last  journeys  to  Jerus. 
Two  methods  of  harmonizing  with  Mt.  1.  Cases  are  the 
same.  Then  must  follow  Mt's  order  because  he  gives 
distinct  note  of  time,  ch.  13:  1.  "that  same  day.''  2. 
Cases  are  analogous.  (Andrews  p,  365.)  Historical  re- 
sult is  unchanged  by  either  method.  Collision  with 
Pharisees  did  occur  at  this  time,  and  only  question  is, 
was  it  repeated?  Xote  intense  excitement  that  was  pre- 
vailing. Mk.  3:  21,  Christ's  friends  think  him  insane, 
endeavor  to  put  him  under  restraint;  ordinary  meals  in- 
terrupted, multitudes  coming  together  "  so  they  could 
not  so  much  as  eat  bread,"  (Mk.  3:  20  ;)  Christ  goes  to 
sea-side,  is  compelled  to  enter  a  boat  to  address  them; 
crowds  ascribe  to  him  Messianic  titles.  "  Is  not  this  the 
Son  of  David?"  Pharisees  alarmed,  unable  to  gainsay 
the  miracles,  impute  them  to  agency  of  Satan.  Mk.  3  : 
22  "  the  scribes  which  came  down  from  Jerus."  shows 
Christ  was  being  watched  by  Jewish  authorities,  and  the 
present  opposition  was  official.  Beelzebub,  name  of 
Philistine  deity,  meaning  "Fly  god,"  Pharisees  change 
to  BeelzebouC  i-  e.,  "  Dung  god."  Christ's  reply.  1. 
Ad  hominmn  argument,  "  If  I  by  Beelzeboul  cast  out 
devils,  by  whom  do  you  ?"  Reference  to  incantations 
and    exorcisms    of  Rabbinical    S,chools.      2.  Parable    of 


103 

Definition  of  Parable — an  illnstrution  of  moral  or  reli- 
o;ious  trutli  derived  from  analogy  of  common  experience, 
it  differs  from  the  Fable  in  that  "  in  the  latter,  qualities 
or  acts  of  a  higher  class  of  beings  may  be  attributed  to 
a  lower  (e.  g.  those  of  men  to  brutes) ;  while  in  the  for-, 
mer,  the  lower  sphere  is  kept  perfectly  distinct  from  that 
which  it  seems  to  ilustrate."  ^S'eander:  It  differs  from 
the  Myth  "  in  being  the  result  of  conscious  deliberate 
thought,  not  the  growth  of  unconscious  realism,  personi- 
fying attributes,  appearing,  no  one  knows  how,  in  popu- 
lar belief."  It  difters  from  the  Proverb  in  that  '•  it  must 
include  a  similitude  of  some  kind,  while  the  Proverb 
may  assert  without  a  similitude,  some  wide  generaliza- 
tion of  experience."  It  differs  from  the  Allegory,  in 
that  the  latter  really  involves  no  comparison.  Parable 
may  be  v^^holly  fictitious  or  partly  based  on  real  events. 

Three  great  groups,  distinctly  marked  in  gospels:  1. 
Seven  in  Mt.  13,  illustrate  nature  of  kingdom  of  Heaven. 
2.  Lk.  Chs.  12-18,  set  forth  immediate,  personal  rehitions 
of  the  individual  believer  to  God.  3.  Mt.  25,  those 
pointing  to  Judgment  and  consummation  of  the  king- 
dom. These  groups  are  supplemental  in  their  relation 
to  one  another.  First  group  contains  five  fundamental 
truths.  1.  Sower  and  seed.  Varied  reception  of  gospel 
truth,  by  different  classes  of  hearers.  2.  Tares  and 
wheat.  Evil  springs  ui>  among  the  good.  3.  Mustard 
seed.  Leaven.  Growth  of  church  externally,  internally. 
4.  Hid  treasure,  Pearl  of  greatprice.  Value  of  kingdom, 
necessity  of  sacrifice.  5.  Net.  Gathering  of  all  kinds ; 
mixed  condition  of  visible  church  until  end  of  world. 
Skeptics  reject  Tares,  and  Net.  because  they  imply  con- 
scious divinity  of  Clirist,  and  contain  the  lute  ideas  of 
imperfection  in  the  church.  They  assert  Mk.'s  parable 
of  seed  growing  secretly,  is  derived  from  that  of  the 
Sower.  Bengel  says  these  Parables  form  outline  of 
Church  History.  Lange  carries  this  idea  to  extreme, 
viz.  Sower,  Apostolic  Age;  Tares,  Ancient  Cath.  Church; 
Mustard  seed:  State  church  under  Constantine  ;  Leaven, 
Mediieval  Churcli  ;  Hid  Treasure,  Reformation  ;  Pearl, 
Christianity  vs.  world  ;  Net,  Final  Judgment.  A  nat- 
ural transition  is  observable  running  through  all  seven. 
The}'  illustrate  self  conscious  divinity  of  Christ:  field  is 


102 

strong  man  armed.  If  Christ  by  Satan  was  casting:  out 
devils,  he  must  lirst  have  couquered  Satan.  3.  Warns 
them  against  the  unpardonable  sin.  4.  Denounces  them 
as  generation  of  vipers,  seed  of  serpent,  i.  e.  children  of 
Satan  in  their  nature,  opinions,  actions. 

§49.  Mt.  12  :  38-45  ;  Lk.  11 :  16,  24-36.  Pharisees  seek 
a  sign.  In  fixce  of  all  Christ's  miracles  they  demand  some 
evidence  of  Messiahship  that  will  accord  with  their  per- 
verted Messianic  notions.  Mt.'s  order  is  preferred  to 
Lk.'s,  because  Ch.  12  :  46  chronological  sequence  is  given, 
"  while  he  yet  talked."  Christ  refused  sign.  He  had 
already  furnished  ample  miraculous  proof  of  Messianic 
claims. 

Parable  of  seven  spirits,  refers  to  present  condition 
of  people.  Apparently  changed  in  feeling  toward 
Christ,  they  would  shortly  become  more  hostile  toward 
him,  than  ever  before.  Shows  that  Christ  was  not  misled 
by  their  seeming  and  probablv  sincere  faith. 

§50.  Mt.  12  ^46-50  ;  Mk.^3  :  31-35  ;  Lk.  8  :  19-21. 
Mother  and  brethren  desire  to  speak  laitk  him.,  his  increas- 
ing popularity  and  antagonism  to  the  Pharisees  giving 
them  concern  about  him.  He  shows  his  earthly  relations 
typify  his  spiritual  relations  to  every  true  believer. 
Great  advance  in  Pharisaic  opposition;  charge  of  blas- 
phemy has  been  made  and  retorted. 

§§54,  55.  Teaching.  Mt.  13.  Mk.  4.  Lk.  8  :  4-16. 
Great  dcuj  of  Parables.  Syn.  here  mark  decided  change 
and  advance  in  Christ's  teaching.  It  was  necessary 
Christ  should  still  instruct  the  people,  but  in  order  to 
blind  opposition,  truth  must  be  clothed  in  parabolic  form, 
that  his  enemies  may  hot  employ  his  words  against  him. 

Four  general  subjects  twice  repeated  characterize  the 
ministry  in  E.  Gal.  up  to  this  point: 

1.  Organization,  §29  and  §40:  2.  Miracles,  §§30-33 
and  §§42-43 ;  3.  Opposition,  §§34-39  and  §§44-50 ;  4. 
Teaching  §41  and  §§54-55. 

Christ  employs  parables.  1.  Symbolic  method  awakens 
imagination,  excites  interest,  exercises  memory  and 
judgment.  2.  "To  him  that  hath  shall  be  giv^en."  The 
recipients  of  God's  grace,  wiH  be  able  to  recognize  his 
truth  even  when  clothed  in  symbolic  form.  What  is 
grace  to  believer,  becomes  judiciaj  condemnation  to  un- 
believer.    Is.  6  :  9  is  thus  fulfilled!     (See  Mt.  13  :  11-15.) 


104 

the  world,  he  sends  his  angels,  he,  separates.  He  might 
naturally  in  Parable  have  referred  to  God,  but  avoids 
doing  80.  Christ's  exposition  of  Sower  and  Tares  is 
model  of  interpretation.  Spiritual  lesson  should  not  be 
sought  in  every  particular,  some  details  serving  merely 
to  keep  up  connection.  Fathers  attempted  to  spiritualize 
all  the  minutiae.  Mt.  13 :  36,  Christ's  going  into  the 
house  makes  apparent  division  in  his  discourse,  parables 
spoken  before  being  addressed  to  people  in  general, 
those  afterward  to  his  disciples  only.  Common 
opinion  is  that  these  parables  were  all  delivered 
upon  one  day.  Though  this  hypothesis  is  not  neces- 
sary, there  is  certainlv  marked  unity  in  these  teachings. 
:N"ote.  §§48-56— one  day:  §57  one  day:  §§58-60 
one  day.  These  three  days  though  possibly  not  succes- 
sive, are  not  widely  separated. 

§56.  Miracles.  Mt.  8  :  18-27  ;  Mk.  4  :  35-41  ;  Lk. 
8  :  22-25 ;  9 :  57-62.  Crossed  the  Lake  on  evening  of 
same  day,  to  escape  crowds  and  avoid  Pharisees.  Cer- 
tain man  desires  to  follow  Christ.  He  replies  ''  Foxes 
have  holes,"  Christ's  poverty  should  not  be  exagger- 
ated;  it  was  voluntary,  not  forced,  v.  60.  Christ's  ser- 
vice supersedes  everything  conflicting  with  it.  New 
class  of 'Miracles  introduced,  those  over  nature,  teaching 
Christ's  care  and  deliverance  of  his  followers  from  dan- 
ger. E.  side  urge  Christ  to  depart,  on  AV.  beg  him  to 
remain. 

§57.  Mt.  8  :  28-34;  Mk.  5  :  1-21  ;  Lk.  8  :  26-40. 
Demoniacs  at  Gadara.  Text  differs  as  to  name  of  place. 
This  case,  palpable  proof  of  individuality  of  devils.  First 
recorded  visit  to  E.  of  Lake;  preparation  for  further 
sojourn.  Tells  demoniacs  to  publish  cures,  because  here 
Christ  was  beyond  the  reach  of  Pharisees,  and  the  report 
would  prepare  for  his  subsequent  visit.  Swine  shows 
region  outside  Jewish  influence.  Their  destruction  no 
part  of  the  miracle,  Mt.  mentions  two  demoniacs,  others 
but  one.  Note  contrast,  dwellers  oji  E.  of  Lake  urge 
Christ  to  depart,  on  W.  beg  him  to  remain. 

§58.  Mt.  9  :  10-17  ;  Mk.  2  :  15-22  ;  Lk.  5  :  29-89. 
Led's feast.  Not  positively  successive;  most  think  so. 
Wieseler,  Ellicott,Tischendorf,  synclironize  it  with  call  of 
Mt.     Mt.  gives  feast  on  account  of  Christ's  intended  de- 


105 

parture  from  Giil.  Two  new  charges  from  Pharisees, 
and  disciples  of  John  Bap.:  a.  Eating  with  publicans 
and  sinners.  O.  T.  regulations  insisted  upon  social 
severance  ;  no  Jew  was  permitted  to  eat  with  those  cer- 
emonially unclean,  h.  Christ  and  his  disciples  neglect 
fasting.  Former  charges  were,  Christ's  making  himself 
equal  to  God,  breaking  Sabbath,  casting  out  devils  bv 
Beelzebub. 

§59.  Mt.  9:  18-26;  Mk.  5:  22-43;  Lk.  8:  41-56. 
Jairus  comes  whilst  Christ  was  conversing  with  disciples 
of  John,  at  Levi's  feast.  On  vv^ay  to  Jairus'  house,  heals 
woman  with  bloody  issue.  Peculiarity  of  cure,  is  mode 
of  approach.  "Virtue  {owajuv)  had  gone  out  of  him" 
does  not  signify  emanation  of  unconscious  power.  Christ 
voluntarily  performed  the  cure.  '  Trouble  not  the  mas- 
ter' Lk.  8  :  49,  indicates  respect  of  higher  classes  for 
Jesus.  Privacy  of  raising  of  Jairus'  daughter  was  due 
to  Pharisaical  opposition. 

§60.  Alt.  9:  27-34.  Tnto  hlind  men  and  dumb  demoniac. 
Organic  disease  symbolizing  darkness  of  mind,  v,  27 
"  Son  of  David,"  Messianic  title  used  as  argument  to  ob- 
tain cure,  fov  first  time.  v.  28  "  Yea,  Lord'' — Christ  re- 
quires faith.  V.  34.  Blasphemous  charge  of  Pharisees 
reiterated. 

§62.  Mt.  9:35-38;  10:1,5-42;  11 :  1 ;  Mk.  6  :  6-13; 
Lk.  9 :  1-6.  Third  circuit  in  Gal.  Christ  now  sends  out 
the  Twelve.  Opposition  had  become  dangerous.  The 
crisis  of  his  life  was  fast  approaching.  Whatever  he 
would  do  to  impress  the  people  of  Gal.  must  be  done 
quickly.  Design  of  mission  of  Twelve,  a.  To  facilitate 
making  such  impression.  Their  mission  a  practical  com- 
ment on  his  own  words,  '  Harvest  plenty,  laborers  few.' 
h.  To  exercise  apostles  in  independent  action.  Fourth 
step  in  organization  of  his  kingdom.  They  still  held  the 
erroneous  ideas  common  to  the  people,  so  Christ  now 
begins  to  separate  them  from  the  world.  On  their  re- 
turn, he  retires  with  them  to  the  desert  for  further  in- 
struction, c.  To  acquaint  the  people  with  apostles,  as 
those  who  had  been  with  him  from  the  first.  Their 
commission  was  temporary  and  national.  Their  circuit 
ended,  their  miraculous  power  ceased.  Into  any 
Samaritan  village  they  were  not  to  enter.    Plenary  apos- 


106 

tolic  authority  conferred  at  Pentecost.  Subject  ot"  their 
teaching  was,  '  Kingdom  of  heaven  at  hand.'  Their 
miracles  were  limited  to  acts  of  healing.  Anointing 
with  oil,  oil  being  t_ype  of  Holy  Spirit,  shewed  that  they 
were  mere  instruments,  and  made  prominent  in  people's 
minds  the  Spirit's  agency.  Disciples  were  to  be  supported 
by  those  to  whom  they  were  sent.  Mt.  10:  16  contains  . 
reference  to  future  opposition  Christ  knew  he  was  to 
encounter.     First  reference  to  coming  trials. 

Xote  prominent  place  given  to  his  person  and  author- 
ity ;  whole  work  of  disci^des  derives  its  authority  from 
him,  its  trials  are  to  be  borne  for  his  sake. 

§63.  Mt.  14:  1-2,  6-12;  Mk.  6:  14-16;  Lk.  9:  7-9. 
Death  of  John  Baptist.  Date  of  death  rightlyJnferred  to 
be  just  prior  to  third  Pass.,  after  feeding  5000. 

Duration  of  his  imprisonment  depends  on  feast  of  John 
5:  1.  If  Pass.,  then  16  months  (Robinson),  if  not  it 
varies  from  5  months  to  3  weeks.  John  Bap.  dies  before 
seeing  the  establishment  of  tlie  kingdom  be  had  heralded. 
His  early  ministrj-  had  been  full  of  glory,  its  end  is  tilled 
with  gloom.  His  fiite  accords  with  his  life.  It  was  well 
that  ail  ascetic,  a  preacher  of  repentance,  a  pioneer  for 
righteousness  sake,  should  die  a  martyr.  His  life  had 
been  l(Mig  enough  to  disclose  the  unity  of  his  work  and 
Christ's  ;  his  death  turned  popular  attention  to  Jesus. 
As  bis  imprisonment  had  caused  Christ  to  withdraw  from 
Judea,  his  death  led  him  to  retire  into  the   wilderness. 

§64.  Mt.  14:  13-21;  Mk.  6,  30-34;  Lk.  9 :  10-17;  John 
6:  1-14.  Return  of  Twelve.  Feeding  of  5000.  John  now 
[)arallel  with  Syn.  Twelve  begin  to  return  from  their 
mission,  the  disciples  of  John  Bap.  report  their  master's 
death,  hence  Christ  withdraws  to  N.  E.  side  of  Lake,  for 
rest  and  safety.  Lk.  9  :  10  :  Place  belonged  to  a  city 
called  Bethsaida.  Common  opinion  is  there  were  two 
Bethsaidas,  Bethsaida  of  Gal.,  Bethsaida  Julias.  Others 
think  there  was  but  one,  built  upon  both  sides  of  the 
Jordan:  but  this  is  improbable,  no  bridge  being  men- 
tioned, and  a  ferry  would  have  been  very  dangerous. 
Bethsaida  was  an  easy  resort  from  Cap.  and  crowds  fol- 
lowed him,  having  seen  him  embark,  going  around  the 
Lake,  by  land.  Christ  was  moved  with  compassion  for 
them,  because  they  were  as  sheep  having   no   shepherd, 


107 

their  only  teachers  he'mcr  Pharisees.  He  therefore  spends 
the  entire  day  in  giving  instrnction. 

The  nearness  of  the  Passover  accounts  for  the  con- 
course of  such  multitudes  in  that  out-of-the-way  place. 
Beside  5,000  men,  tliere  being  women  and  children,  there 
must  have  been  congregated  at  least  10,000  souls.  Their 
orderh'  arrangement  in  companies,  prevented  all  con- 
fusion, and  imposture.  One  of  Christ's  greatest  miracles  ; 
a  species  of  creation  ;  extensive  multiplication  of  created 
things. 

Skeptics  note  following  differences  in  the  accounts  : 
1.  As  to  place.  Desert  place,  yet  in  vicinity  of  city. 
John  says  a  mountain.  2.  As  to  conversation.  Syn,, 
make  the  disciples  the  lirst  tu  mention  feeding  the  multi- 
tudes, John  makes  Jesus  iirst  to  speak.  3.  Repetition 
of  feeding  midtitudes  recorded  by  Syn.  increases  diffi- 
culty of  accepting  either  as  genuine.  These  difficulties, 
and  the  inconceivableness  (to  skeptics)  of  a  miracle 
displaying  such  creative  power,  have  led  to  unusual  etibrt 
to  explain  it  away. 

1.  31ythical explanation.  J^To  such  actual  event  occurred. 
Christ's  discourse  concerning  his  body,  John  6.  fur- 
nished mythical  basis  for  current  tradition.  Strauss 
finds  its  mythical  origin,  in  manna  of  O.  T.  and  in  the 
analogous  miracles  of  Elijah,  (1  King  17,)  and  Elisha  (2 
Kings  4.)  2.  NatUTalisiic  explanation.  Christ  excited  chai-ity 
among  those  in  the  caravan  journeying  to  feast,  to  sup- 
ply from  their  store  of  provisions  those  fainting  with 
hunger.  Some  say  it  was  originally  a  parable  of  Christ's, 
relating  to  spiritual  food,  transformed  into  a  narrative; 
others  imagine  that  Mt.  has  unwittingly  recorded  two 
separate  traditions  -of  the  same  occurrence.  Olshausen 
and  Lange,  note  the  compressing  into  a  single  instant  of 
the  many  gradual  processes  of  nature  and  of  art ;  not 
only  the  growth  of  the  grain,  but  also  the  preparation 
of  the  food.  Effect  of  fhis  miracle  (John  6  :  14.):  Peo- 
ple applv  Messianic  titles  to  Christ,  and  attempt  to  force 
him  to  adopt  their  views  of  theMessiahship,  and  to  com- 
pel him  to  be  their  king.  Lange  remarks  "the  rabble 
think  they  have  found  tlieir  Bread  King."  Disciples  em- 
bark to  cross  the  lake.  -The  people  are  sent  away. 
Christ  goes  apart  into  a  mountain  to  pray.  §65.  Omit- 
ted. 


108 

^66.  John  6  :  ^li— 1  :  1.  Discourse  in  Si/nagor/xc  at 
Capernawn.  Only  extended  pas8ao;e  in  John's  gospel, 
the  scene  of  which  is  laid  in  Gal.  John  not  only  accords 
with  the  Syn.  in  givinti:  the  miracle,  hut  also  makes  the 
same  crises  in  Christ's  life  and  same  effect  prodnced  on 
his  followers.  Morning  after  the  miracle,  the  multitudes 
missing  Christ  and  his  disciples,  follow  him  to  Caper- 
naum. This  is  culmination  of  ministry  in  E.  Gal.  False 
Messianic  excitement  has  been  aroused  by  the  miracle  of 
the  loaves.  Christ  therefore,  in  the  synagogue  at  Cap. 
delivers  a  searching  discourse  calculated  to  separate  the 
spiritual  from  the  sensual  among  the  crowds  that  followed 
him,  thus  drawing  nearer  to  himself  the  true  disciples 
and  driving  away  the  mere  carnally  minded.  He  unfolds 
the  true  character  of  his  kingdom  ;  its  blessings  spiritual, 
not  material.  Miracle  furnishes  theme  of  the  discourse  ; 
earthly  food  is  not  to  be  sought,  but  himself,  the  bread 
which  came  down  from  heaven,  v.  63.  '"  The  words 
that  I  speak  unto  you,  they  are  spirit,  and  they  are  life," 
is  the  key-note  of  the  entire  discourse.  Three  divisions: 
1.  ch.  6:  27-51.  This  the  work  of  God,  men  should  be- 
lieve on  Christ,  and  feed  upon  his  flesh.  Whosoever 
comes  to  Him  shall  not  be  cast  out,  but  shall  obtain  eternal 
life.  2.  Ch.  6  :  51-56:  Comment  on  preceding  statements. 
Christ's  flesh,  the  true  bread  from  heaven.  3.  Ch.  6  : 
59-71.  Effect  of  discourse:  multitudes  are  offended  and 
desert  him. 

Never  before,  save  to  Nicodemus,  had  Christ  declared 
that  he  came  down  from  heaven.  He  claims  the  power 
to  impart  spiritual  life.  This  discourse  from  a  mere  man 
would  have  been  blasphemy  and  folly.  This  was  a  test 
event  for  his  own  apostles,  v.  67  "  Will  ye  also  go 
away  ?"  Peter  answers  v.  68  "  To  whom  shall  we  go  ?" 
"Thy  words  are  hard  but  it  is  a  question  of  despair  with 
us,"  (v.  69)  "  we  believe  and  are  sure  that  thou  art  that 
Christ."  First  time  the  title  of  Messiah  passed  between 
Christ  and  his  most  intimate  friends. 

Critics  object  to  this  discourse  as  unhistorical  ;  could 
not  have  been  delivered  previous  to  institution  of  Lord's 
Supper,  must  have  been  wholly  unintelligible  both  to 
Christ  and  apostles,  until  that  event.  Peter's  confession 
of  Christ's  divinity    is    out    of  place    before    Pentecost. 


109 

Ans  :  The  very  mystery  and  difficulty  of  this  discourse 
adapt  it  to  the  end  for  which  it  was  intended,  the  siftincr  of 
believers  from  unbelievers.  Christ  shows  (vv.  70,  71,) 
that  this  discriminating-  process  must  be  applied  even  to 
the  Twelve.  "  Have  I  not  chosen  you  twelve,  and  one 
of  you  is  a  devil?" 

John  7:  1  closes  the  ministry  in  E.  Gal.,  and  indicates 
the  extent  to  which  opposition  had  increased  during  this 
period,  by  the  statement  that  Christ  "would  not  walk 
in  Jewry  "  and  was  unable  to  attend  tlie  approaching 
passover  "  because  the  Jews  sought  to  kill  Him." 

THE  AlINISTRY  IN  NORTHERN  GALILEE. 

Second    Period. 

Duration  of  the  Period :  From  the  third  Passover  (coin- 
cident with  death  of  the  Baptist)  to  the  Feast  of  Taber- 
nacles, six  months  later.  The  record  is  contained  in  Mt. 
14:  13;  18:  35;  Mk.  6:  30;  9:  50;  Luke  9:  10-56. 
John  gives  all  in  one  verse,  7  :  1,  which  corresponds  with 
the  statement  of  the  Synoptists.  It  is  a  period  of  great 
journeyings.  The  order  of  events  in  the  Syn.  is  perfect. 
This  is  because  the  period  is  shorter,  and  there  is  less 
room  for  variations.  Then  the  subjects  of  conversation 
are   closely  connected  with  the  historic  events. 

Characteristics  of  the  Period :  1.  Dangerous  opposition 
causing  Christ's  withdrawal  from  Capernaum.  2.  This 
withdrawal  widened  the  sphere  of  action.  Instead  of 
remaining  in  Capernaum  he  now  goes  into  Phoenicia, 
then  into  Decapolis,  passing  up  the  Jordan  to  Caesarea 
Philippi.  He  had  two  ends  in  view:  a.  To  avoid  dan- 
ger; h.  to  extend  his  .usefulness.  Besides,  his  passing 
the  borders  of  the  Holy  Land  signified  the  calling  of  the 
Gentiles.  3.  His  teachings  assumed  a  new  character. 
For  the  first  time  he  teaches  publicly  his  death  and  resur- 
rection. 

Object  of  the  Period:  To  strengthen  the  faith  of  his  dis- 
ciples. Hence  he  uses  express  terms  to  teach  his  Mes- 
siahship,  in  contrast  with  the  preceding  period.  The 
disciples  are  now  taught  rather  than  the  people.  The 
main  point  was  to  prepare  them  for  his  approaching 
death.     The  central  event  of  the  preceding  period  was 


110 

the  Sermon  on  the  Mount;  of  this  period,  the  Transfig- 
uration. The  events  on  these  Mountains  mark  the 
beginning  and  end  of  the  Galilean  ministry. 

§67.  Christ  justifies  his  disciples  for  catinr/  with  unwashed 
hands.  This  charge  of  the  Pharisees  shows  the  strict 
watch  they  kept  over  Christ's  actions.  The  previous 
charge  was  Sabbath-breaking.  Now  he  is  charged  with 
disregarding  the  traditions  of  the  Jews  on  which  the 
Pharisees  laid  so  much  stress.  Christ  applies  to  them, 
Isa.  29  :  13,  and  warns  the  multitude  against  this  ritual 
burden.     Vide  Mt.  15  :  1-20  .   Mk.  7  :  f-23. 

§68.  T/ie  daughter  of  a  Syro-Pha:nician  iconian  healed. 
Mt.  15:  21-28;'  Mk.'7:  24-30.  The  border  between 
Galilee  and  Phoenicia  is  called,  from  its  two  larger  cities, 
Tyre  and  Sidon.  Did  Christ  go  to  the  borders,  or  hei/ond, 
or  through  ?  (Mk.  7  :  24.) 

The  last  view  is  the  l)est  for  three  reasons  :  1.  It  agrees 
best  with  the  account  in  Mk.  2.  It  suits  best  the  pur- 
port of  the  miracles.  8.  It  is  put  almost  beyond  doubt 
by  the  amended  text — ota  Icomvoc  implying  through 
Phoenicia. 

Tyre  and  Sidon  were  opponents  of  the  Theocracy. 
Therefore  the  miracle  shows  Christ's  intevded  mission  to 
the  Gentiles.  1.  Because  the  woman  is  called  a  Canaan- 
ite,  which  people  belonged  originally  to  the  land.  2. 
She  is  called  a  Greek,  whicli  is  the  0.  T.  name  for  Gen- 
tile. 3.  Christ's  own  words:  "lam  not  sent  but  unto 
the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel." 

§69.  Healinq  of  the  deaf  and,  dumb  ?uan.  Mt.  15:  29-38; 
Mk.  7:  31-37,  8:  1-9.  From  Phoenicia  Christ  passes 
south  through  Decapolis,  inhabited  largely  by  Greeks. 
Some  say  he  came  around  south  of  the  sea;  others  that 
he  traveled  directly  east  from  Phoenicia.  It  is  more  proba- 
ble that  he  went  north  as  far  as  Damascus,  thus  preparing 
for  Paul.  Tlie  same  miracles  are  renewed  because  he  is 
iu  a  new  country. 

But  the  present  miracle  has  some  peculiarities.  1. 
It  is  the  first  case  of  combined  deafness  and  dumbness. 

2.  Xot  an  absolute  but  a  partial  dumbness — tongue-tied. 

3.  The  mode  of  healing — takes  the  man  apart  and  prays. 
Wiiy  ?  Because  the  Messianic  question  is  not  prominent, 
and  the  people  are  Polytheists.     Therefore  he  wished  to 


Ill 

teach  them  of  the  true  Grocl.  Many  other  miracles  were 
wrought,  and  the  effect  of  them  is  stated  in  Mt.  15  :  31. 
Then  follows  the  miracle  of  feeding  the  4000,  wrought 
from  compassion  for  the  people  far  from  home,  and 
especially  to  lead  them  to  tlie  true  God. 

§70.  The  Pharisees  and  Saddiicees  again  require  a  Sign. 
Mt.  15  :  39  ;  16:  1-4  ;  Mk:  8  :  10-12.^  Our  Lord  comes 
back  to  Capernaum  and  again  to  Magdala,  a  little  town 
south  of  Capernaum.  For  the  first  time,  the  Pharisees 
and  Sadducees  are  united  against  him,  which  Lange 
thinks  is  proof  that  the  Sanhedrim  had  passed  official 
measures  against  him.  For  the  fourth  time  the  Phari- 
sees seek  a  sign,  and  ('hrist's  answer  is  recorded  in  Mt. 
16  :  2-3. 

§72.  Blind  Man  of  Bethsaida  healed.  This  miracle  is 
mentioned  b}-  Mark  alone.  It  is  private,  and  the  cure  is 
gradual,  to  illustrate,  as  some  think,  the  gradual  enlight- 
enment of  the  regenerated  soul. 

§73.  Peter's  Confession  at  Ceesarea  Philippi.  Mt.  16  :  13- 
30;  Mark  8:  27-30;  Luke  9:  18-21.  Luke  menHons 
these  events  because  so  important.  C.  Philippi  lay  at 
the  base  of  Mt.  Hermon,  which  is  about  8000  ft.  high. 
The  sources  of  the  Jordan  are  here.    (Vide  Smith's  Diet.) 

Result  of  ike  Geditean  3Iinistry.  As  a  w.hole,  the 
result  has  not  been  to  lead  any  but  the  disciples  to  believe 
that  he  is  the  Messiah.  This  truth  is  not  popularly  pro- 
claimed. He  still  enjoins  them  not  to  say  tliat  he  is  the 
Christ.  But  the  truth  is  so  clear  that  it  brings  out  Peter's 
famous  confession  :  "  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  son  of  the 
living  God."  Christ's  reply  contains  ixx/.y^aiafov  the  first 
time.  It  is  used  only  once  besides  this  in  the  Gospels. 
(Malt.  18  :  17.) 

The  Rationalists  confess  that  the  agreement  of  the 
Evangelists  here  denotes  a  crisis  in  the  life  of  Christ,  but 
they  dispute  as  to  its  nature.  Baur  and  Strauss  say  that 
"  Son  of  Man  "  (Mt.  16  :  13)  had  not  before  been  consid- 
ered a  Messianic  expression.  The  change,  therefore,  was 
from  an  idea  secretly  and  suddenly  entertained  by  Christ 
to  its  open  profession,  Schenkel  thinks  the  crisis  to  be 
that  after  this  he  offered  himself  for  the  first  time  as  the 
Messiah. 

But  these  theories  require  rejection  of  the  Gospel  by 
John,  and  they   subvert  the  whole  history.     The    only 


11: 


tiling  true  is  tliat  the  claiiii  to  be  the  Messiali  had  not 
been  made  prominent  before.  But  the  Disciples  had 
recognized  him  as  Son  of  God  before  this.  Vide  Mt. 
14  :  33.  He  now  makes  his  claim  public,  and  goes  on  to 
teach  that  his  kingdom  would  be  independent  of  the  old 
Theocracy.  "  Upon  this  rock  will  I  build  my  Church." 
That  is,  the  doctrine  contained  in  Peter's  confession 
would  be  its  corner-stone. 

§74.  Prediction  of  his  Death  and  Resurrection.  Mt.  16  : 
21-28;  Mk.  8:3i-38;  9:1;  Lk.  9  :  22-24.  This  is  a 
new  element  in  Christ's  teaching.  The  Syn.  recognized 
tliis  transition.  Our  Lord  shows  them  that  he  had  not 
come  to  set  up  the  material  kingdom  that  they  expected, 
but  that  he  was  to  suffer  death.  This  shocked  them,  and 
Peter  says  :  "  Be  it  far  from  thee.  Lord."  These  predic- 
tions are  important  in  three  respects: 

1.  In  correcting  the  mistaken  ideas  of  his  Apostles. 
These  predictions  prepared  them  for  that  sutfering  which 
they  had  not  anticipated. 

2.  In  preserving  their  faith.  What  would  have  be- 
come of  them  when  Christ's  death  came,  without  these 
predictions  ? 

3.  Although  they  did  not  apprehend  his  words  at  the 
time,  they  did  remember  them  during  Passion  Week 
(Luke  24  :  7-8).  The  Divinity  of  the  Savior  gleams 
through  these  predictions  in  a  striking  manner.  They 
are  very  minute,  a.  As  to  the  place — Jerus.,  which  he  had 
avoided,  b.  His  death  was  not  to  be  a  local  but  an  offi- 
cial and  national  event,  c.  The  mode  of  his  suffering 
was  predicted.  He  was  to  be  "  put  to  death  " — but  wa's 
to  rise  again  on  the  third  day. 

The  Rationalists  make  strong  assaults  upon  these  pas- 
sages. I.  l^hey  i^\'A\n\  discrejmricy  in  the  accounts.  1.  John 
is  enigmatical  while  the  Syn.  are  plain.  2.  John's  refer- 
ences cover  the  whole  life,  while  the  Syn.  refer  only  to 
the  end.  3.  In  John  the  words  are  addressed  to  the 
multitude  ;  in  the  Syn.  to  the  Disciples.  4.  Christ  ap- 
peals to  the  O.  T.  and  mistakes  its  meaning.  He  avails 
himself  of  certain  Messianic  passages  which  the  Ration- 
alists deny  to  be  so. 

Ans  :  a.  Christ  appeals  to  the  O.  T.  as  proof  only  to 
those  who  believe  in  the  O.  T.     b.  The  objection  is  based 


113 

on  the  false  as&umption  that  only  isolated  passages  refer 
to  the  Messiah,  whereas  the  whole  O.  T.,  especially  the 
whole  ceremonial  law,  refers  to  Christ.  lie  is  the  key 
to  it  all.  c.  The  exegesis  on  which  these  discrepancies 
are  based  is  accepted  only  by  unbelieving  Jews  and 
Rationalists. 

II.  Again  it  is  objected  that  if  Christ  predicted  his 
death  in  this  way,  the  surprise  and  vacillation  and  in- 
credibility of  the  Disciples,  when  his  trial  and  death  did 
occur,  are  inexplicable. 

Ans  :  a.  Prophecies  however  explicit  require  fulfill- 
ment as  the  key  to  their  siguificancy  and  inspiration. 
Although  the  second  advent  of  Christ  has  been  foretold, 
how  much  do  we  know  about  it  ? 

b.  Again  this  was  a  time  of  great  excitement.  The 
Disciples  wei-e  struck  dumb  for  the  moment,  and  liad  not 
sufficient  calmness  to  reason  about  these  matters. 

c.  The  true  interpretation  of  these  prophecies  contra- 
dicted all  their  notions  of  the  Messiah.  Besides,  O.  T. 
prophecies  were  not  all  to  be  fulfilled  in  his  present 
advent. 

III.  These  predictions  simply  a  shrewd  forecast.  His 
sriffering  would  bo  at  Jerus.  because  he  could  bring  that 
about.  But  the  question  arises,  How  did  Christ  know 
he  would  not  be  arrested  in  Galilee,  on  this  theory  ?  To 
obviate  this,  Strauss  says  the  whole  matter  was  incorpo- 
rated with  the  record  and  is  without  foundation. 

Liiermediate  Position  of  Thcistic  critics  :  These  ])redictions 
belong  to  Csesarean  period.  Before  this  Christ  had  ex- 
pected to  convert  the  nation.  But  experience  taught 
that  death  was  necessary  to  victory. 

Ans  :  1.  It  is  inconsistent  with  the  record  in  Mt.  12  : 
40  ;  23  :  88,  39. 

2.  This  theory  is  inconsistent  with  itself.  For  if  the 
Resurrection  was  not  an  actual  fact,  why  did  the 
Apostles  suffer  martyrdom  for  their  belief  in  it? 

3.  Christ's  knowledge  of  the  O.  T.  renders  it  impossi- 
ble (Isa.  49:  3.)  The  Sceptics  themselves  claim  that  he 
got  his  knowledge  from  O.  T.,  and  by  a  false  exegesis 
applied  it  to  himself  Hence  on  their  own  ground  he 
had  a  definite  conception  of  his  sufferings  and  death. 

Another  objection  attempts  to  relieve  Christ  from  all 
participation  in  the  theory  of  the  Atonement.     But  see 


114 

how  one  Sceptic  devours  anotlier.  For  some  of  them 
say  that  all  such  passages  are  an  interpolation,  while 
others  deny  that  they  teach  the  Atonement. 

Transition  Period.  Thus  far  Christ  had  addressed  the 
Twelve.  But  he  now  turns  to  the  multitude.  He  fore- 
warns them  of  the  cost  of  following  him— great  self  denial 
required,  yet  with  the  rewards"  of  eternal  life.  But 
those  who  do  not  follow  him  must  suffer  the  loss  of  their 
souls.  (This  was  the  last  N".  T.  passage  commented  on 
by  Dr.  Addison  Alexander  just  before  his  death.) 

§75.  The  Transfif/uration.  The  events  of  this  section 
occurred  about  a  v;eek  after  the  preceding  conversation. 
'No  difficulty  in  the  fiict  that  Mt.  says  six  days,  and  Lk. 
eight,  for  both  speak  of  one  week,  only  one  includes,  and 
the  other  excludes,  the  first  and  last  days.  Besides  Lk. 
says  (l»cs^  =  "  about.''  Tradition  makes  Mt.  Tabor  in  Gal. 
the  Alt.  of  Transfig.  But  this  goes  back  only  to  fourth 
cent,  and  then  not  to  Palestine.  Mt.  and  Mk.  say  "  a 
high  mountain,"  and  Lk.  "  the  mountain."  Robinson 
and  Staidey  object  to  Tabor  bee.  at  that  time  occupied 
by  a  fortified  city.  Last  events  occurred  in  the  region 
of  Caesarea  Philippi.  Lightfoot :  "  Evangelists  intimate 
no  change  of  place."  Besides,  Mk.  9  :  30  says:  "And 
departing  thence  they  passed  through  Galilee,"  implying 
that  they  were  not  then  in  Gal.  Current  opinion  favors 
Mt.  Her  mo  n. 

Taking  with  him  Peter,  James  and  John,  he  goes  into 
the  mountain  to  pray,  and  then  took  place  the  Trans- 
figuration. What  the  Transfiguration  was  is  a  matter  of 
much  conjecture.  It  is  sufficient  to  know  that  Christ's 
personal  identity  remained.  (Farrar,  chap.  36.)  Peter 
proposed  to  make  three  Tabernacles,  or  tents,  that  they 
might  dwell  there.  Then  a  cloud  came,  which  is  always 
a  sign  of  Jehovah's  presence,  and  on  looking  Jiround 
they  saw  Jesus  alone. 

Three-fold  desir/n  of  the  T ran sf  (juration  : 

1.  It  afl:brded  the  Disciples  a  "new  proof  from  Heaven 
of  Christ's  divinit}',  thereby  strengthening  their  faith  for 
future  conflict. 

2.  It  was  necessary  for  Christ's  own  spiritual  support 
and  comfort,  before  entering  upon  the  agony  and  death 
which  were  near  at  hand — analogous  to  the  baptism 
before  the  Temptation. 


115 

3.  The  design  was  symbolical — setting  forth  the  nature 
of  Christ's  kingdom,  and  the  glory  that  shall  follow  those 
that  suffer  for  it.  A  specimen  of  the  heavenly  glory  and 
of  the  resurrection.  Also  shows  the  essential  oneness  of 
Christ's  kingdom  with  the  O.  T.  dispensation.  Moses 
and  Elias  representative,  men — one  the  giver,  the  other 
the  champion  of  the  Law.  These  two  last  points  set  forth 
in  II.  Peter  1  :  16-18.  Christ  charged  them  to  tell  no  man, 
because  the  multitudes  had  not  faith  to  understand  the 
scene,  and  the  Disciples  themselves  could  not  understand 
"  what  the  rising  from  the  dead  should  mean." 

In  the  next  four  sections,  we  have  a.  the  healing  of  the 
demoniac  child,  b.  the  second  prediction  of  Christ's 
death  and  resurrection,  (\  the  miraculous  provision  of  the 
tribute-money,  and  d.  the  contentions  of  the  Disciples  as 
to  who  should  be  greatest  in  Christ's  kingdom. 

LAST  JOURNEYS  TO  JERUSALEM. 

Our  Lord  now  begins  his  last  journey  to  Jerusalem, 
there  to  renew  the  evidence  of  his  Messiahship.  The 
time  is  from  Tabernacles  to  the  Passover,  six  months  lack- 
ing one  week. 

Why  is  Luke  so  full  ?  a.  Because  he  is  supplementary. 
b.  It  accords  with  his  plan  to  bring  out  the  personal  re- 
lations and  human  sympathies  of  Christ. 

The  question  of  Harmony  is  very  difficult,  because 
John  gives  us  five  chapters  Avliich  must  go  into  the 
Synoptic  narrative.  Here  is  the  problem:  the  Synopt- 
ists,  after  the  Galilean  Ministry,  relate  a  journey  to  Jeru- 
salem as  if  it  were  the  last.  But  John  records  ///r^e  jour- 
neys :  (1)  A  journey  to  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  in  Octo- 
ber, (John  7,  10.)  (2).  A  journey  to  the  Feast  of  Dedi- 
cation in  December  (John  10:22-23.)  On  account  of 
opposition  Jesus  retires  to  Bethany  in  Perea,  but  the 
death  of  Lazarus  brings  him  to  Bethany,  near  Jerusalem. 
Then  on  account  of  further  opposition  he  retires  to 
Ephraim,  (John  11 :  54.)  (3)  He  sets  out  from  Ephraim 
for  Jf-rusalem  "six  days  before  the  Passover"  (John  12: 
1.)  Where  was  Jesus  during  the  two  months  between 
the  Tabernacles  and  Dedication  ? 

llow  are  these  to  be  harmon-ized  ?  It  is  best  to  confess 
that  we  have  not  enough  material  to  settle  the  question 


116 

satisfactorily.  DeWette  thinks  the  chapters  in  Luke  are  a 
collection  of  unhistorical  material  which  the  writer  die] 
not  know  where  to  place.  Exegetical  objections  to  this 
view:  a.  The  unity  of  the  discourses  in  Luke.  b.  All  the 
material  furnished  belongs  to  this  period,  llengstenberg 
thinks  no  order  is  discernible  between  Luke  and  John. 
Scldeiermacher,  Olshausen  and  Neander  think  that  the 
accounts  of  the  two  journeys  are  blended,  viz.,  the 
journeys  to  the  Tabernacle  and  Passover.  The  narrative 
of  the  first  two  come  in  at  Luke  18:  35.  They  record 
no  conversations  or  incidents  previous  to  their  becoming 
parallel  with  Luke. 

Greswell  makes  all  the  Synoptists  connect  with  the 
last  journey  in  John.  Then  Luke  9 :  51  is  parallel  with 
John  11  :  55.  '  According  to  this  view  the  Synoptists 
pass  over  the  pei'iod  and  record  only  the  last  joui'ney  to 
Jerusalem  just  before  the  Passover.  By  this  view  the 
unity  of  Luke  is  preserved,  and  the  Synoptists  appear 
to  record  only  one  journey.  But  thedifiiculty  isthatearly 
in  Luke's  luirration  Christ  is  brought  into  the  iiouse  of 
Mary  and  Martha  at  Bethany,  (chap.  10)  and  then  in 
chap.  17:  11  he  is  passing  through  Galilee  and  Samaria. 
Greswell  thinks  Luke  refers  to  another  village  near 
Jerusalem.  But  this  would  make  the  jouri\ey  protracted 
and  irregular.  Again  John  says  our  Lord  passed  some 
time  in  Ephraim,  after  raising  Lazarus. 

Wieseler  fixes  on  three  points  in  Luke  where  it  is  said 
Jesus  vvas  going  to  Jerus.  and  makes  them  correspond 
with  John's  journeys: 

1.  To  Tabernacles,  Luke  9  :  51  compares  with  John  7:  10. 

2.  To  Bethanv,  "     13:22         ''  "       "11:1. 

3.  To  Passover,  "     17:11         "  "       "11:55. 
Arguments  for    Wieseler' s  view:     It  is  claimed  that  the 

narrative  in  John  fits  in  to  the  break  in  Luke,  e.  g.,  we 
are  told  that  the  "journey  to  the  Tabernacles  was  made 
secretly.  This  agrees  with  Luke's  statement  that  he 
w^ent  through  Samaria.  The  common  way  was  through 
Perea.  The  Samaritans  reject  him  because  his  "  face 
was  set  towards  Jerus."  Here  comes  in  the  parable  of 
the  good  Samaritan.  Such  striking  coincidences  all 
through  have  won  over  many  supporters.  Ellicott  fol- 
lows it  in  full,  Tischendorf  qualifies  it  by  saying  that 
it  is  not  so  certain  as  it  seems  to  be. 


117 

,  Objections.  1.  Lack  of  positive  evidence.  But  in  such 
a  case  we  look  onl}-  for  probabilities.  2.  Luke  purports 
to  give  only  onejournej.  Ans.  :  Luke  does  not  say  there 
was  but  o??(  journey.  3.  Luke  9  :  51  seems  to  refer  to  a 
period  just  before  his  death.  Ans.  :  Couhl  as  well  refer 
to  the  whole  period  of  six  months.  4.  Luke  13  :  22  must 
mean,  it  is  said,  into  or  up  to  Jerus.  But  tiiis  interpreta- 
tion denies  that  sf'c  ever  has  the  sense  of  direction.  5. 
The  phm  implies  a  sojourn  in  Jerusalem  from  the  Taber- 
nacles to  Dedication,  This  is  said  to  be  contrary  to 
John  12:  1.  Tischendorf  takes  an  exception  to  Wieseler 
and  makes  the  Dedication  occur  in  John  10:  22.  An- 
drews ag-rees  as  to  the  last  two  journeys,  but  makes  this 
difference  :  He  considers  Luke  9  :  51  the  journey  to 
Dedication,  and  makes  it  parallel  with  John  7  :  10,  which 
passage  he  makes  refer  to  a  final  departure.  Objections 
to  Andrews:  1.  It  assumes  a  new  return  to  Galilee 
after  Dedication,  2.  It  is  unnatural  to  put  John  7,  8,  9 
at  the  close  of  the  Galilean  ministry.  They  belong  to 
this  period  of  journeyings. 

Robinson  makes  Lukel3  :  22 — 19:  28  the  last  journey  ; 
Luke  10:  17—11:  33  the  journey  between  Tabernacfes 
and  Dedication,  and  Luke'll  :  33—13:  10  he  puts  in  the 
ministry  in  Eastern  Galilee.  Objections:  1.  It  is  arbi- 
trary. 2.  It  breaks  up  the  connection  just  where  com- 
mentators find  a  striking  unity.  3.  Robinson  himself 
says,  "  I  suggest."  The  sceptics  say  that  this  diversity 
proves  the  record  unhistorical. 

Coincidences  of  John  and  Luke :  1.  Both  represent  Jesus, 
after  the  Galilean  Ministry,  as  entering  upon  an  extended 
period  of  journeyings.  2.  Both  agree  that  the  region 
was  Judea  and  Perea.  3.  Both  agree  that  it  was  tow- 
ard Jerus.  4.  Both 'agree  as  to  the  character  of  the 
works  and  teaching,  for  both  refer  to  a  period  of  hostility 
which  brings  out  declaration  of  his  Divinity. 

Design  of  the  Period:  A  more  open  avowal  of  Mes- 
siahship — at  the  feast  and  while  journeying.  He  oft'ers 
himself  again  at  Jerus.  and  is  rejected.  Notice  the  ad- 
vance in  the  doctrine  of  his  person.  He  speaks  of  com- 
ing forth  from  God;  of  his  pre-existence;  of  his  one- 
ness with  the  Father;  of  his  being  the  source  of  life. 
But  he  still  withholds  the  titles,  MeWah  and  Christ. 


118 

The  sphere  of  labor  is  now  changed  from  Galilee  to 
Judea.  Ill  the  Sjnoptists  this  is  brought  out  in  the 
journeyings  through  Perea.  The  opposition  increases. 
The  Pharisees  seek  to  break  down  his  popularit}'  by  put- 
ting difficult  questions  so  worded  that  a  direct  answer 
would  oft'end  one  party  or  another.  For  example,  the 
question  about  divorce.  On  the  other  hand,  our  Lord 
delivers  a  series  of  discourses  against  the  Pharisees, 
warning  the  people  against  them.  John  gives  evidence 
of  the  covert  purpose  of  the  Pharisees  to  put  Christ  to 
death,  John  7:  25. 

Christ  now  proceeds  to  give  private  instructio?i  to  his 
disciples,  in  reference  to  the  change  so  soon  to  occur. 
He  gives  new  charges,  prophecies  and  parables.  (The 
numbering  of  tlie  sections,  from  this  point,  is  irregular, 
but  Tischendorf's  pUm  is  preferred.) 

§81.  Final  Departure  from  Galilee.  Luke's  expression 
is  remarkable  :  "  He  steadfastly  set  his  face  to  go  to 
Jerusalem."  The  journey  was  not  compulsory  but 
voluntary. 

Objections:  L  He  said  to  his  brethren  that  he  would 
not  go,  and  atterwards  went  up  secretly  (John  7:  8-11.) 
It  is  claimed  that  this  is  either  vacillation  or  deception. 
Ans :  Our  Lord's  words  refer  to  the  time  and  manner  of 
his  going.  Did  not  say  he  was  not  going,  but  '•  I  go  up 
not  yet."     He  refused  to  go  in  the  public  procession. 

2.  Again,  it  is  said  tliat  the  rejection  of  his  messen- 
gers at  the  Samaritan  village  (Lk.  9:  53)  does  not  agree 
with  the  favorable  reception  in  John  4th. 

Ans:  The  latter  was  at  the  lieginning,  the  former  at 
the  close  of  his  Galilean  ministry.  The  rejection  by  the 
Samaritans  is  now  caused  by  their  prejudices.  Christ's 
face  now  toward  Jerus.  He  was  therefore  regarded  as 
favoring  the  Jews. 

3.  Again  it  is  said  Lk.  9  :  52  re})resonts  Christ's  last 
journey  to  be  through  Samaria.  But  Mt.  and  Mk.  make 
it  through  Perea.  Andrews  (p.  361)  answers  this  by  the 
reasonable  supposition  that  he  started  to  go  through 
Samaria,  but  after  his  rejection  changed  his  jilan  and 
went  through  Perea. 

§83.  Feast  of  Tabernacles.  This  was  one  of  the  great 
annual  feasts  of  the  Jews,  (Lev.  23  :  34)  to  commemorate 


119 

the  Divine  goodness  in  the  Wilderness,  and  also  to  show 
gratitude  for  the  rich  fruits  of  the  season.  It  was  the 
most  joyous  of  all  the  Jewish  festivals, — so  joyous  that 
Plutarch  mistook  its  character  and  called  it  a  festival  in 
honor  of  Bacclius. 

There  was  a  division  of  sentiment  concerning  Christ 
among  those  at  Jerus,  Some  said,  ''  He  is  a  good  man  : 
others  said,  N"ay  but  he  deceiveth  the  people  "  (John  7  : 
12.)  Another  expression  of  John  is  noticeable  :  "  How- 
beit  no  man  spake  openly  of  him  for  fear  of  the  Jews." 
This  refers  to  the  Jews  who  opposed  Christ.  The  people 
did  not  know  whicli  side  to  take,  because  it  was  uncer- 
tain what  the  Sanhedrim  would  do. 

Historic  Points  :  1.  Christ  takes  up  his  discourse  with 
the  Pharisees  where  he  had  left  off  (John  7  :  23)  eighteen 
months  before.  The  miracle  to  which  he  refers  in  v.  21, 
is  the  healing  of  the  impotent  man  at  Bethesda,  which 
was  followed  by  the  charge  of  Sabbath-breaking.  He 
here  openly  charges  them  with  their  purpose  to  kill  him. 

2.  The  emphatic  statements  in  verses  28-31  of  his  Divin- 
ity. This  gave  great  otfense  to  some,  but  no  man  laid 
hands  on  him,  and  many  believed  in  him,  asking  "  When 
Christ  Cometh  will  he  do  more  miracles  than  these  which 
this  man  hath  done  ?" 

3.  The  official  act  of  the  Sanhedrim  to  arrest  him,  be- 
cause of  his  influence  over  the  people.  Alf  this  on  the 
first  day.  ]^ow  we  come  to  the  second  day — "  that  great 
day  of  the  feast"  which  was  the  last.  Jesus  stood  and 
cried  :  "If  any  man  thirst,  let  him  come  unto  me  and 
drink."  The  water  which  suggested  this  invitation  is  sup- 
posed to  have  been  that  which  was  taken  from  the  pool  of 
Siloam  on  each  of  the, seven  days  and  poured  upon  the 
ground  in  commemoration  of  the  miraculous  provision 
of  water  in  the  Wilderness.  In  it  Christ  saw  a  type  of 
that  Spirit  which  the  world  was  to  receive  through  him. 
The  officers  report  to  the  Sanhedrim  that  they  were  una- 
ble to  arrest  him.  The  reason  they  give  is  remarkable  : 
"  ]S"ever  man  spake  like  this  man" — showing  the  strong 
impression  Christ's  personal  bearing  had  made  upon 
them.  The  answer  is  received  with  ridicule :  "  Are  ye 
also  deceived  ?" 


120 

Except  for  the  remonstrance  of  jSTicodemns  (v.  51),  the 
Sanhedrim  would  have  condemned  Christ,  immediately. 
To  him  they  sneerinsjly  replied :  "  Art  thou  also  of  Galilee  ? 
Search  and  look,  for  out  of  Galilee  ariseth  no  prophet." 
But  in  the  last  statement  they  were  mistaken. 

§84.  Woman  tnken  m  Adidkn/.  Most  critics  reject  the 
first  eleven  verses  of  the  8th  of  John.  The  external  and 
grammatical  evidence  against  it  is  very  strong.  Tregelles 
claims  that  it  is  not  original  with  John,  but  is  an  ancient 
extra-canonical  record  of  an  actual  fact.  The  passage  is 
not  in  the  Sinaitic,  Peshito,  A.,  B.,  or  C,  uncial  MSS. 
It  is  found  only  in  the  Vatican  MS.  and  some  of  the 
early  Fathers.  But  it  seems  to  accord  too  well  with  the 
character  of  Christ,  to  be  an  invention. 

§85.  Discourses  in  the  Temple.  The  effect  of  striking  out 
John  8  :  2-11  would  be  to  bring  all  these  discourses  on 
the  last  day  of  the  feast.  But  it  is  more  natural  to  con- 
sider the  references  in  John  7  :  37  and  8  :  14  to  relate  to 
two  dift'erent  days.  If  this  be  correct,  tliere  are  two 
prominent  periods  of  teaching  :  (1)  8:12-21;  (2)  8:21- 
59. 

In  the  first,  Christ  proclaims  himself  the  Light  of  the 
world.  The  Pharisees  object  to  his  bearing  witness  of 
himself,  and  say  his  record  is  not  true.  Our  Lord  proves 
its  Truth,  a.  by  saying  that  the  Father  bears  testimony  of 
him;  and  6,    by  declaring  his  oneness  with   the  Father. 

In  the  second,  he  discourses  of  his  origin,  of  his  going 
away,  and  of  their  dying  in  their  sins.  lie  charges  tliem 
with  the  design  of  killing  him,  and  alludes  to  the  nian- 
ner  of  his  death  in  verse  28th  :  ''  When  ye  have  lifted 
up  the  son  of  man." 

The  pre-existence  of  Christ  is  asserted  by  him  in  ex- 
press terms.  The  Jews  regard  the  declaration  as  blas- 
phemy and  give  way  to  rage.  They  tear  up  the  stones 
from  the  Temple  pavement  to  put  him  to  death  as  a  blas- 
phemer. But  Jesus  hid  himself,  and  so  got  out  of  their 
way. 

§90.  Healiiif/  of  a  max  blind  from  birth,  on  the  Sabbath. 
Robinson  postpones  this  till  just  before  tlie  Dedication. 
But  the  prevailing  opinion  is  that  it  comes  in  immediately 
after  stoning  referred  to  in  John  8  :  59,  In  proof  of 
Messiahship,  Jesus  opens  eyes  of  blind  num.     The  Phari- 


121 

sees  after  conversing  with  the  Latter,  are  enraged  because 
he  adheres  to  Jesus,  and  cast  him  out  of  the  "Syiiao-ogne. 
(Farrar,  cliap.  41,  Vol.  IT.)  The  effect  of  this  niirade^was 
to  produce  a  division  among  the  people.  Many  of  them 
claimed  that  he  had  a  devil.  Others,  that  a  devil  could 
not  open  the  eyes  of  the  bjind.     (John  10:  19-21.) 

§89.  The  Seventy  sent  out.  Tisch.  places  this  section  in 
the  interval  between  Dedication  and  Tabernacles  ; 
Wies.  while  Jesus  is  on  the  way  to  Tabernacles.  Place  :' 
Majority  say  Perea,  some  Gal.  Best,  Perea,  Judea 
and  Samaria.  The  design  has  a  clear  reference  to 
Christ's  coming  once  more  to  otter  himself  as  the  Mes- 
siah. Meyer:  This  whole  journey  intended  to  present 
to  the  people  opportunity  for  final  decision.  Andrews  : 
Their  mission  was  not  only  to  preach  the  kingdom,  but 
to  proclaim  the  King.  In  addition,  probably  a  desire  to 
accustom  the  disciides  to  their  work,  and  familiarize 
the  people  with  them  as  witnesses  of  the  truth.  Some 
say  that  the  second  order  of  church  officers,  viz.;  Pres- 
byters, is  here  established.  Wies.:  The  Seventy  repre- 
sent the  calling  of  the  Gentiles.  Their  mission  was  the 
counterpart  of  that  of  the  Twelve.  The  latter  chosen  in 
reference  to  the  twelve  tribes  ;  the  seventy  with  reference 
to  the  seventy  nations  of  the  Gentiles  for  which  prayers 
were  ottered,  or  the  number  may  have  reference  to*^the 
seventy  ciders  of  Israel,  or  to  the  Sanhedrim.  But  the 
leading  idea  seems  to  be  a  visitation  of  the  whole  country 
(Vide  Ebrard,  pp.  322-3;  Andrews,  pp.  352-355;  Farrar, 
Vol.  11.,  ch.  42.  Also  comp.  Gen.  10  and  Gen.  46  •  27 
with  Deut.  32  :  8.) 

Objections  :  I.  Silence  of  the  other  Evangelists,  Lk. 
being  the  only  one  that  -mentions  the  Seventy.  An's  :  a. 
The  objection  would  be  valid  if  the  Seventy  had  been 
set  up  as  a  permanent  order  in  the  church.  Other 
Evangelists  silent  concerning  a  great  portion  of  this 
period,  but  say  nothing  contrary  to  Lk's  account. 

II.  Instructions  to  Seventy  and  Twelve  so  similar  that 
the  Evangelists  give  ditterent  accounts  of  same  occur- 
rence. Ans:  a.  The  instructions  were  similar  because 
the  duties  were  similar,  b.  But  there  is  an  important 
ditterence  in  the  fact  that  a  permanent  commission  was 
given  to  the  Twelve   but  not  to  the  Seventy.     Ebrard  • 


122 

Address  to  Twelve  has  the  character  of  induction  into  a 
jyermancnt  office,  whereas  that  to  Seventy  has  reference 
to  a  single  task. 

III.  Symbolical  use  of  number  Seventy  is  proof  of  a 
later  date,  and  of  artifice.  Ans  :  Some  number  of  mes- 
sengers must  have  been  chosen,  and  whatever  it  might 
be  Uie  Sceptics  would  be  sure  to  find  fault  witli  it. 

§89.  TJie  Seventy  return.  Difficult  to  assign  this  section 
with  any  certainty.  The  Seventy  probably  returned, 
two  by  two,  bringing  a  glorious  report  (Lk.  10:  17-21.) 

§86.  The  Good  ^Samaritan.  Lk.  10  :  25-37.  In  the 
parable  Christ  teaches  that  God  may  make  distinctions 
among  men,  but  men  may  not.  All  men  are  our  neigh- 
bors.    Hence,  we  must  do.  good  to  all  men. 

Second  Group  of  Parables :  There  are  seventeen  in  all, 
closely  connected  and  illustrating  personal  duties — four- 
teen of  them  peculiar  to  Lk.  Three  things  worthy  of 
notice:  1.  Tlieir  appropriateness  to  the  plan  of  Luke's 
gospel.  They  set  forth  God's  mercy  to  sinners,  and  the 
duties  consequent  therefrom.  Mt.'s  group  of  seven  all 
addressed  to  the  people  and  the  Disciples  ;  Lk.'s  intend- 
ed lor  publicans  and  sinners.  Mt.'s  relate  to  the  king- 
dom of  God  ;  Lk.'s  point  out  the  way  of  salvation.  2. 
Their  appropriateness  to  the  period  of  Christ's  life,  in 
which  he  finaMy  offered  himself  to  the  nation.  3.  They 
are  directed  against  prominent  errors  of  the  Pharisees. 

Classification  of  these  Parables.  They  may  be  reduced 
to  a  four-fold  division  : 

I.  Those  showing  the  love  of  God  in  Christ  as  the 
source  of  all  blessing,  a.  To  the  poor  and  lowly — para- 
ble of  Marriage  Supper,  b.  As  preventing  grace — Lost 
Sheep,  Lost  Piece  of  Money,  Prodigal  Son. 

II.  Those  showing  the  means  of  obtaining  God's 
mercy,  and  the  resulting  duties.  a.  Importunity  in 
prayer— Friend  at  Midnight,  Importunate  Widow,  b. 
Kepentance  and  humility  —  parable  of  Pharisee  and 
Publican,  c.  Watchful  preparation— the  Waiting  Ser- 
vants (Lk.  12:  27.)  d.  Counting  the  cost — Building  a 
Tower,  e.  Universal  love  to  our  neighbor — the  Good 
Samaritan.  /.  Using  this  world's  good's  without  abusing 
them — Unjust  Steward. 


123 

III.  Those  showing  the  judgments  which  follow  neglect 
or  abuse  of  God's  nierc}'.  a.  Abuse  of  God's  grace — 
Barren  Fig-tree.  b.  Abuse  of  God's  providence— Rich 
Man  that  built  Larger  Barns,  c.  Abuse  of  Wealth — 
Dives  and  Lazarus,  d.  Danger  of  partial  moral  refor- 
mation. Leads  to  worse  state  than  the  first — Return  of 
Unclean  Spirit.     (Lk.  ll':  24.) 

IV.  Those  showing  that  rewards  and  punishments  are 
to  be  proportioned  to  fidelity  of  stewardship — Parable 
of  Ten  Talents — Mustard  Seed — Leaven. 

Sections  48,  49  and  51  are  parallel  with  Mt.  12,  and 
for  this  reason  Robinson  treats  them  together.  Vide 
small  syllabus,  p.  12. 

§91.  Feast  of  Dedication.  Previous  to  this  feast,  (John 
10:  22.)  Jesus  had  retired  to  Bethany  in  Perea.  Why 
return  to  Jerus.  ?  Not  merely  to  keep  the  Feast,  since 
the  whole  land  kept  it,  but  to  confront  the  Pharisees. 
Not  a  feast  of  the  Law,  but  instituted  by  Judas  Macca- 
baeus,  164  B.  C,  in  honor  of  tlie  cleansing  of  the  Tem- 
ple, and  the  rebuilding  of  the  Altar,  after  the  Expulsion 
of  the  Syrians.  Season:  The  oidy  feast  in  the  winter- 
time, which,  according  to  Wieseler,  fell  this  year  on 
Dec.  20.  (Vide  Farrar,  chap.  45.)  Christ  was  walking 
in  this  place  because  it  was  winter,  the  porch  being  part 
of  the  original  temple  which  escaped  destruction  by 
Nebuchadnezzar. 

Scene  interesting  because  it  discloses  the  struggle  in 
the  minds  of  the  Pharisees.  "  Ilow  long  dost  thou  make 
us  to  doubt?  If  thou  be  tlie  Christ  tell  us  plainly." 
(John  10  :  24.)  Request  not  unreasonable  for  Christ  had 
all  along  claimed  the  office,  and  cfeclaimed  the  title. 
Two  views  in  regard  tp  the  spirit  of  the  question  : 

I.  That  it  was  insidious  and  dishonest,  intended  to 
draw  out  a  definite  claim  of  Messiahship  so  that  they 
could  have  something  definite  on  which  to  base  their 
charges. 

II.  That  it  was  honest  and  fair.  Christ  had  never  told 
them  positively  that  he  was  the  Messiah,  and  now  when 
challenged  he  still  does  not  answer  dii-ectlj',  because  of 
their  misconceptions.  According  to  their  understanding 
of  the  term  he  was  not  the  Messiah.  But  he  affirms  his 
Messiahship    to   them  in   three   ways  :   1.  He  had    told 


124 

them  before,  and  they  did  not  believe  him.  2.  By  refer- 
ring to  the  works  he  had  wrought.  3  His  gift  to  his 
sheep  is  eternal  life,  and  he  is  the  Son  of  God,  one  with 
the'Father.  This  enraged  the  Jews  and  they  took  up 
stones  to  stone  him.  "  But,"  says  Farrar,  "  his  undis- 
turbed majesty  disarmed  them  with  a  word."  "  Many 
good  deeds  did  I  show  you  from  my  Father  ;  for  which 
of  these  do  yon  mean  to  stone  me?"  He  then  quoted 
the  82nd  Psalm,  where  judges  are  called  gods.  But  he 
executes  a  higher  ofiice.  This  seems  to  ascribe  his  Son- 
ship  not  to  his  nature,  but  to  his  being  sent  by  the  Father. 

Ans. :  1.  The  terms  used  imply  his  prp-existence.  2. 
Even  if  he  does  here  advance  only  the  lowest  claim  to 
the  title,  "  Son  of  God,"  it. is  no  proof  that  he  does  not 
elsewhere  use  it  in  highest  sense.  N"o  one  besides 
Christ  ever  says,  "  I  and  my  Father  are  one." 

Then  they  attempt  to  seize  him,  but  Farrar  says  "  they 
could  not.  His  presence  overawed  them.  They  could 
only  make  a  passage  for  him,  and  glare  their  hatred  upon 
him  as  he  passed  from  among  them." 

Because  of  the  opposition  Christ  goes  to  Bethany  in 
Perea,  where  John  had  been  baptizing.  The  latter  is 
mentioned  because  a  witness  for  Christ.  How  long  he 
staid  there  is  not  known,  but  St.  John  tells  us  that  many 
resorted  to  him  and  believed  on  him,  being  convinced  of 
the  truth  of  John  Bap.'s  testimony.  (John  10:  41-42.) 
(The  sections  from  95  to  101  were  passed  over.) 

§§92,  93.  Raising  of  Lazarus.  Counsel  of  Caiaphas.  A 
message  comes  to  Christ  in  Perea  from  the  sisters  of 
Lazarus,  stating  that  their  brother  is  sick.  After  two 
days  Christ  came  to  Bethany  and  found  that  Lazarus  had 
been  buried  four  days  (John  11.) 

Theories  explaining  the  time  :  a.  Lazarus  died  on  the 
day  when  the  message  was  sent.  Christ  delayed  two 
days,  and  then  went  to  Bethany  occupying  one  day  with 
the  journe}'. 

b.  Christ  received  the  message  that  Lazarus  was  sick, 
waited  two  days  for  his  death,  and  occupied  four  days 
with  the  journey.  Farrar  takes  the  former  view,  mainly 
on  the  ground  that  Bethany  in  Perea,  where  Christ  was, 
is  only^about  20  miles  from  the  Bethany  near  Jerus., 
where  Lazarus  lived.     He  also  infers  that  the  family  of 


125 

Lazarus  was  one  of  wealth  and  position  from  its  proximity 
to  Jerus.  and  from  tlie  concourse  of  Jews  who  had  come 
to  sympathize  with  the  hereaved  sisters.     (Farrar,  chap. 

47.) 

Opposition  among  the  Jews  :  This  is  again  referred  to  in 
the  remonstrance  of  the  Disciples  against  Christ's  going 
up  to  Jerus.  lest  he  should  be  killed.  Thomas  says: 
"  Let  us  also  go  tliat  we  may  die  with  him."  (John  11  : 
16.)     Christ  goes  up  voluntarily  to  sacrifice  himself. 

Design  of  the  3Ihricle  :  To  understand  it  aright,  recall 
design  of  period  — to  give  tlie  people  final  opportunity  of 
accepting  liim  as  Messiah.  On  the  other  hand,  the  peo- 
ple hesitated  to  come  to  a  decision  because  the  action  of 
the  rulers  was  uncertain.  Clirist's  object  was  to  secure  a 
decision  of  the  people,  for  or  against  him.  Hence  the 
prayer  at  the  grave  of  Lazarus, — "  because  of  the  people 
which  stood  by."  (John  11  :  42.)  This  culminating  event 
is,  therefore,  reserved  until  near  the  close  of  Christ's 
ministry,  and  for  the  neighborhood  of  Jerusalem.  The 
proof  that  the  Father  had  sent  him  is  thus  given  in  the 
presence  of  the  rulers.  Still,  there  is  a  contrast  between 
the  openness  of  his  private  teaching,  e.  g.,  to  Marthf^^ 
when  he  says,  "  I  am  the  resurrection  and  the  life,"  and 
his  public  teaching  when  he  says,  "  that  they  may  believe 
that  thou  has  sent  me." 

Efect  of  the  Miracle :  Very  profound.  Many  be- 
lieved, and  others  ran  with  excitement  to  tell  the  ruleus. 
(John  11  :  45-46.)  This  was  the  last  link  in  the  chain  of 
events  which  led  to  the  malicious  decision  of  the  Sanhe- 
drim. Farrar:  "  They  foi<W  not  deny  the  miracle ;  they 
loould  not  believe  on  hinj  who  had  performed  it ;  they 
could  only  dread  his  growing  influence,  and  conjecture 
that  it  would  be  used  to  make  himself  a  king,  and  so 
end  in  Roman  intervention  and  the  annihilation  of  their 
political  existence." 

Why  should  the  people's  faith  in  Christ  produce  such 
a  result  ?  Two  ans  :  1.  Some  say  this  was  a  mere  pre- 
tense by  the  Pharisees.  2.  True  view  is  that  Pharisees 
recognized  real  result  of  Christ's  claims.  If  the  spiritual 
view  of  Christ's  kingdom  were  now  to  prevail  with  the 
people  all  hope  of  political  deliverance  and  independence 
would  be  lost,  as  well  as  their   present  sources  of  liveli- 


126 

hood.  Being  engaged  in  a  bitter  struggle  for  national 
independence,  they  were  convinced  by  the  address  of  the 
High  Priest  that  'it  was  better  for  one  man  to  perish 
-rather  than  that  the  whole  nation  should  perish  (John 
11  :  50-51.)  They  would  not  even  stop  to  inquire  whether 
this  one  person  were  innocent  or  guilty,  says  Farrar. 
Still,  though  selfish  and  Pharisaic,  their  reasons  contained 
elements  of  power.  "  Then  from  that  day  forth  they  took 
counsel  together  for  loput  him  to  death,"  although  this 
was  not  the  first  time  the  Pharisees,  as  a  party,  had  so 
determined.  Vide  John  5  :  16-18.  At  Tabernacles 
Jesus  accused  them  of  this  design.     John  7:  19. 

Advice  of  Caiaphas  :  John  remarks  that  the  words  of 
Caiaphas '  were  not  his  own,  but  a  prophecy  of  the 
Atonement,  he  "  being  the  High  Priest  that  same  year." 
(Vide  suggestive  note  by  Farrar  on  the  expression  "that 
same  year!"  Vol.  II.,  p.  174.)  Common  view  is  that 
the  prophecy  was  involuntary  on  part  of  Caiaphas.  But 
what  he  meant  in  a  low  sense,  God  meant  in  a  high 
sense. 

Objections  to  the  Miracle  :  Sceptics  flourish  here.  Spin- 
oza savs  if  he  could  have  believed  that  miracde  he  would 
have  become  a  Christian  and  broken  in  pieces  his  own 
philosophical  system. 

1.  It  is  said  the  Disciples  misunderstood  Jesus  when 
he  said,  "  Our  friend  Lazarus  sleepeth,"  and  that  Martha 
misunderstood  him  when  he  said,  "  Thy  brother  shall 
rise  again,"  which  would  not  have  been  the  case  if  he 
had  been  in  the  habit  of  working  miracles. 

2.  It  is  alleged  that  the  Jews  would  not  have  referred^ 
to  an  inferior  miracle— opening  the  eyes  of  the  blind — if 
Christ  had  power  to  raise  the  dead. 

Ans:  The  Jews  refer  to  the  blind  man's  case  because 
it  was  of  recent  occurrence,  and  had  made  a  deep  im- 
pression. The  other  cases  of  resurrection  had  taken 
place  in  Gal.,  and  could  have  been  known  to  the  Jews 
near  Jerus.,  only  by  report.  _  ,      ,    ,. 

3.  It  is  alleged  that  we  cannot  consistently  believe 
that  Christ  would  wait  two  days  after  receiving  the  mes- 
sao-e  that  Lazarus  was  sick.  If  Lazarus  was  not  dead,  it 
was  cruel  in  him  to  tarry ;  if  he  was  dead,  it  was  mere 
ostentation  to  delay. 


127 

Ans  :  If  there  was  any  delay,  which  some  deny,  its 
object  was  to  exercise  the  faith  of  the  sisters  and  the  Dis- 
ciples. Besides,  it  is  possible  that  he  had  an  important 
work  to  finish  in  Perea. 

4.  The  prayer  at  the  grave  is  objected  to.  It  is  said  to 
be  out  of  analogy  with  his  other  miracles.  Strauss  does 
not  hesitate  to  call  it  a  "sham  prayer,"  offered  for  the 
sake  of  appearance,  in  reference  to  those  that  stood  by, 

Ans :  Christ  did  not  not  pray  on  other  occasions,  be- 
cause he  desired  to  give  evidence  of  his  own  power  and 
divinity.  Here  he  prays  to  show  his  relation  to  the 
Father,  appealing  to  God  in  the  sight  of  the  Jews. 

5.  Another  objection  is  found  in  the  silence  of  the 
Synoptists  concerning  a  family  made  so  prominent  by 
John.  Luke  mentions  Martha  and  Mary,  but  neither 
Lazarus  nor  Bethany. 

6.  The  Synoptists  silent  about  the  miracle,  which  was 
the  most  important  of  all. 

Aiiswei' :  a,  Lazarus  and  his  family  were  specially 
obnoxious  to  the  Jews  because  of  their  intimacy  with 
Jesus,  and  especially  because  Lazarus  was  a  living  wit- 
ness of  his  power  to  raise  the  dead.  Hence  there  is  a 
convincing  argument  in  the  fact  that  the  Syn.,  writing 
first,  forbore  to  make  this  family  prominent  lest  they 
should  suffer  persecution.  This  obstacle,  however,  no 
longer  existed  when  John  wrote.  But  it  may  be  added 
danger  to  themselves  seems  never  to  have  influenced  the 
Evangelists  to  hide  any  of  the  facts  of  Christ's  life. 

b.  But  a  better  answer  is  found  in  the  settled  plan  of 
the  Syn.  not  to  relate  any  events  occurring  at  Jerus.  until 
the  closing  week  of  Christ's  life.  They  confine  them- 
selves mainly  to  Gal.  Min,  Each  tells  the  things  most 
directly  within  his  own  scope.  Hence,  Farrar  :  "  Now 
since  raising  of  Lazarus  was  no  greater  evidence,  to  them, 
of  miraculous  power  than  those  which  they  recorded, 
and  since  it  fell  within  the  Judean  cycle,  the  omission  of 
the  miracle  is  no  more  inexplicable  than  the  omission  of 
the  miracle  of  Bethesda  (John  5,}  or  the  healing  of  the 
man  born  blind,  (John  9.")     Farrar,  chap.  47. 

It  is  further  objected  that  we  cannot  accept  the  Syn.'s 
account  of  the  sudden  burst  of  applause  with  which 
Jesus  was  received  in  Judea  after  the  Gal.  Min  :   Mt,  19: 


128 

1,  2.  But  notice  that  it  is  Feast-time  when  lie  reaches 
Jerus.,  and  ninltitucies  from  Gal.  are  ah-eady  there. 

Naturalistic  Theory  of  the  3Iirade.:  1.  ISTot  actual  natu- 
ral death.  Only  a  case  of  trance.  "  lie  is  not  dead  but 
slcepeth  "  is  to  be  taken  literal!}'.  Renan  claims  there 
was  actual  collusion  between  Christ  and  the  sisters.  2. 
The  miracle  o^rows  out  of  a  misunderstanding  of  the  con- 
versation with  Martha  about  the  resurrection. 

iMytldcal  Theorij  :  Strauss  held  this  theory  at  first,  but 
he  at  last  adopted  the  Tubingen  view  mainly.  He  says 
raising  of  Lazarus  is  a  fiction  based  on  one  of  Luke's 
parables.  Baur  and  others  say  it  is  a  creation  of  the  2nd 
century,  and  its  germ  was  the  expression,  "  I  am  the 
resurrection."  But  all  these  theories  illustrate  the 
credulity  of  unbelief,  since  any  one  af  these  views  is 
harder  to  support  than  the  plain  Gospel  narrative.  (Vide 
Ebrard,  pp.  351-358.) 

Christ  retires  to  Ephraim.  On  account  of  the  action  of 
the  Sanhedrim,  (John  11 :  47-54)  Christ  retires  to  the 
citv  of  Ephraim,  to  delay  the  execution  of  the  decree 
until  his  time  should  come.  Where  is  Ephraim  ?  Some 
say  east  of  the  Jordan.  More  likely  near  Jerusalem. 
Some  identify  it  with  the  Ephraim  i'n  2  Chron.  13  :  19, 
near  to  Bethel,  or  twenty  miles  north  of  Jerusalem. 
Josephus  speaks  of  a  cavalry  expedition  of  Vespasian 
by  way  of  Ephraim  to  Bethel.  (Vide  Robinson's  Greek 
liar.  pp.  203-4;  Farrar,  Vol.  XL,  p.  176.)  Intervening 
sections  not  touched  upon.     Vide  small  syllabus,  p.  14. 

§107.  Third  Prediction  of  Christ's  Death.  This  predic- 
tion more  specific  than  in  74th  or  77th  section.  Judicial 
death  now  predicted,  to  be  accomplished  by  the  help  of 
the  Gentiles,  (Mt.  20  ;  Mk.  10;  Lk.  18.)  He  foretells 
the  manner  of  his  death,  viz.,  by  crucifixion,  and  predicts 
that  he  shall  rise  on  the  third  day.  He  tells  this  to  the 
Twelve  alone.  Mark  notes  the  fear  of  the  Disciples, 
chap.  10:  32,  from  wliich  it  may  be  inferred  tiiere  was 
something  supernatural  in  Christ's  appearance. 

PASSION^  WEEK. 

Natural  Divisions  :  1.  From  the  arrival  in  Bethany  to 
the  Passover  Supper — six  days.  2.  From  the  Supper  to 
the  Crucifixion.     3.  From  the  Resurrection  to  the  Ascen- 


1l9 

sion.  Recorded  in  Mt.  21-28  chaps.;  Alk.  11-16;  Lk. 
19-24;  Joliii  12-21.  Space  given  by  each  Evangelist; 
Mt.  little  more  than  one-third  ;  Mk.  little  less  than  one- 
third;  Luke  one-fourth  ;  John  nearly  one  half.  In  many 
cases  three,  in  some  four,  parallel  accounts. 

Characteristics  of  the  Period:  I.  A  period  of  voluntary 
sacrifice.  Christ's  hour  is  now  at  hand,  and  he  submits 
voluntarily  to  be  condemned  and  executed  by  his  ene- 
mies. Seeks  the  most  public  places.  Takes  possession 
of  the  Temple,  and  for  three  days  holds  his  foes  at  bay. 
All  their  former  plots  to  take  him  had  failed.  But  now, 
by  an  event,  accidental  on  their  part,  but  designed  on 
his,  they  are  enabled  to  seize  him,  and  lie  without  resist- 
ance gives  himself  up  to  them.  His  death,  therefore, 
voluntary,  and  hence  sacrificial — a  sacrifice  for  sin.  No 
other  theory  can  explain  the  facts. 

II.  It  is  a  period  in  wliich  Christ  prominently  asserts 
his  claims  to  the  title  of  Messiah.  This  he  does  in  three 
ways:  a.  Typically  by  securing  tlie  Hosannas  of  the 
multitude  as  he  enters  Jerus.  "b.  Publicly  during  his 
trial,     c.  By  his  teaching. 

III.  The  Teaching  is  supplemental  and  appropriate  to 
the  period.  In  all  Christ's  teachitig  there  is  a  marked 
advance.  We  have  here  three  kinds  of  teacliing  :  a. 
Tlie  last  of  the  three  groups  of  Parables  :  1.  Concern- 
ing "Kingdom  of  Heaven  ;"  2.  The  way  of  salvation  ; 
3.  The  Judgment,  b.  Final  discourses  against  Phari- 
sees, c.  Consolatory  instruction  to  Disciples.  In  Mt. 
these  instructions  largely  prophetic;  in  John  both  pro- 
phetic and  consolatory.  Explains  to  them  that  he  must 
go  away  in  order  that  the  Comforter  may  come. 

Order  of  Ecents.  The  Evangelists  governed  by  same 
plan.  The  order  is  alike  in  alTfour  except  in  two  instan- 
ces :  a.  John  makes  the  Supper  at  Bethany  the  first 
event  of  the  week,  while  Syn.  place  it  on  the'^eve  of  the 
third  day.  ^>.  They  differ  as  to  the  time  of  cursing  the 
barren  fig-tree.  In  their  plan,  Mt.  refers  to  propliecy, 
Mk.  to  details,  by  days,  and  Lk.  is  supplementary.  Rul- 
ing idea  is  contrast  between  Christ's  personal  dignity  and 
gentleness  and  his  cruel  treatment  by  the  pries'ts,  rulers 
and  people. 

Succession  of  doijs.  This  is  obtained  from  Mk.  by  count- 
ing back  from  the  Passover  Supper  five  days  ;  and  also 


130 

from  John  12  :  1.  "  Then  Jesus  six  days  before  the  Pass- 
over came  to  Bethany."  John's  peculiar  idiom  means, 
literally,  six  days.  Notice  we  have  in  John  a  lueek  both 
at  the  beginning  and  end  of  Christ's  ministry.  Mode  of 
counting  days  involves  two  questions  :  a.  Shall  we  count 
in  both  extieines?  b.  Was  14th  Nisan,  Thursday  or 
Friday?  Did  the  Supper  come  on  the  day  of  the  feast, 
or  on  the  evening  before?  The  day  of  Crucifixion,  we 
have  seen  in  the  opening  lectures  on  Chronology,  was 
Friday,  15th  Nisan.  The  Supper  was  the  regular  Paschal 
meal  eaten  on  Thursday  the  14th. 

Theories:  1.  Wies.,  Lich.,  Andrews  count  back  six 
days  from  Thursday  the  14th,  excluding  the  latter,  which 
brings  us  to  Friday,  the  8th  as  the  day  of  arrival  in 
Bethany.  2.  Lange  includes  Thursday  which  gives  the 
9th,  or  the  Jewish  Sabbath  as  the  day  of  Christ's  arrival. 
Lange  supposes  that  Christ  halted  on  Friday  a  Sabbath- 
day's  journey  from  Jerus.  3.  Those  who  follow  Bleck's 
arrangement,  as  Tisch.,  Ell.,  Alford  and  Schaff',  make 
Friday  tlie  14th  Nisan.  But  as  they  count  backward  six 
days  excluding  Friday  the  days  of  the  week  remain  un- 
altered. 4.  Robinson  holds  Friday  to  have  been  the  first 
day  of  the  feast.  Six  days  before  would  make  the  arrival 
in  Bethany  on  Sunday,  and  he  supposes  the  Jewish  Sab- 
bath to  have  been  spent  in  Jericho. 

Objections  to  Robinson  :  a.  He  begins  a  day  later 
than  any  other  Harmonist  and  compresses  the  4th  and 
5th  days  into  one.  (Mk.  14:1.)  h.  The  feast  did  not 
begin  on  the  15th.  (Lerit.  23  :  5.)  c.  It  is  contrary  to 
tradition  which  makes  Palm  Sunday  the  commemorative 
day  of  Christ's  entrance  into  Jerus.  Robinson  makes 
the  entrance  on  Monday,  d.  His  own  earlier  editions 
take  the  other  view.  Farrar  :  "  Thither  (the  loved  home 
at  Bethiiny)  he  arrived  on  the  evening  of  Friday,  Nisan 
8,  A.  U.  C.  780  (March  31,  A.  D.  30,) "six  days  before  the 
Passover,  and  before  the  sunset  had  commenced  the  Sab- 
bath hours."  Vol.  II.  p.  188.  Vide  Andrews,  pp.  396- 
7-8. 

§§111,  131.  Supper  at  Bethany.  John  places  this  on  the 
evening  before  the  public  entrance  into  Jerus.  The 
Synoptists  place  it  on  the  eve   of  Tuesday,  or  two  days 


131 

before  the  Passover  (Mt.  26  :  2.)  This  difference  alleged 
to  be  irreconcilable. 

Ans  :  Neither  John  nor  the  Syn.  date  the  Supper 
positively.  The  six  days  of  John  do  not  date  the  Supper 
but  the  arrival  in  Bethany;  and  the  two  days  of  Mt.  and 
Mk.  do  not  date  the  Supper  but  the  betrayal  of  Judas. 
Farrar:  "  It  is  only  in  appearance  that  the  Syn.  seem 
to  place  this  feast  two  days  before  the  Passover.  They 
narrate  it  there  to  account  for  the  treachery  of  Judas, 
wliich  was  consummated  l)y  his  final  arrangements  with 
the  Sanhedrim  on  the  Wednesday  of  Iloh.'  week  ;  but  we 
see  from  St.  John  that  this  latter  must  have  been  his 
second  interview  with  them — at  the  iirst  interview  all 
details  had  been  left  indefinite."  (Farrar,  Vol.  XL,  p. 
188,  Note.) 

Robinson  follows  order  of  Syn.  Tliese  are  his  rea- 
sons :  1.  The  offence  taken  by  Judas  at  this  feast  was 
the  occasion  of  his  treason.  Rulers  had  resolved  to  delay 
arrest.  But  Judas'  proposal  on  Tuesday,  (Supper  on 
Tuesday  eve.)  gave  thetn  an  unexpected  opportunity. 
Ans :  It  does  not  appear  that  Judas  went  immediately  to 
the  priests. 

2.  The  TOTS  of  Mt. — "  then  Judas]  went  out.*'  Ans  : 
But  zure  is  not  always  used  by  Mt.  in  reference  to  time. 
He  often  makes  it  connect  passages  which  are  not  suc- 
cessive. 

3.  John  transposes  events  in  order  to  complete  account 
of  occurrences  at  Bethany. 

Arguments  infacor  of  John''. s  order  :  1.  John  more  com- 
plete. 2.  Trj  iTta'jiJiou  (John  12  :  12) — "  the  next  day  " — 
was  the  day  of  public  entrance.  Best  exegesis  favors 
John's  order.  3.  Whple  passage  in  Mt.  and  Mk. 
seems  to  be  parenthetical.  Balance  of  probability  in 
favor  of  John's  order.  According  to  latter  Christ  arrived 
in  Bethany  on  Friday.  His  friends  make  him  a  feast. 
as  had  been  done  when  he  left  Capernaum  and  Perea. 
He  did  not  decline  this  mode  of  being  honored.  Sisters 
of  Lazarus  improve  the  occasion  to  display  their  grati- 
tude, and  Jesus  makes  reference  to  his  approaching  death. 

Popular  Excitement.  In  John  11  :  55-57,  we  read  that 
many  went  from  the  country  to.  Jerus.  to' the  Passover. 
The  great  theme  of  conversation   anions:  the  rulers  was 


132 

Christ.  "  What  think  ye,  that  he  will  not  come  to  the 
feast?"  They  expected  negative  answer.  He  had  not 
come  to  previous  feast.  From  John  11  :  57  we  learn  that 
the  Sanhedrim  had  made  pnhlic  charges  against  Christ, 
and  were  waiting  to  take  him.  But  their  donhts  are 
soon  solved  hy  the  public  arrival  of  Jesus,  which  in- 
creased the  excitement.  Multitudes  flocked  out  of  the 
city  to  meet  him. 

Place  of  the  Supper  :  It  is  urged  that  it  must  have  been 
in  the  liouse  of  Martha  and  Mary  because  they  were 
present  and  •'  Martha  served,"  which  is  supposed  to  con- 
tradict Mt.  and  Mk.  who  say  it  was  in  the  house  of  Simon 
the  leper.  But,  as  Ebrard  suggests,  why  could  not 
Martha  insist  upon  "  serving"  in  the  house  of  the  host 
with  whom  her  family  were  intimate  ?  •  Some  say  that 
Simon  was  the  father  of  Lazarus  ;  others  that  lie  was  tlie 
husband  of  Martha.  Or  he  may  have  been  the  owner 
of  the  house  in  which  Martha  and  Mary  lived. 

Mode  of  Anointmg :  John  says  the  fed  ;  lAi.  and  Mk. 
the  luad.  Ebrard,  in  reply  to  objectoi'S,  inquires.  Why 
not  both?  Then  according  to  John,  it  was  Judas  who 
objected  to  the  waste  ;  according  to  Mt.  it  was  ''  his  dis- 
ciples." Ans:  Where  is  it  denied  by  John  that  none  of 
the  disciples  but  Judas  objected  ?  John  mentions  Judas 
in  order  to  give  the  motive  for  his  objection. 

Another  objection  is  founded  upon  the  resemblance 
between  this  anointing  and  the  one  in  Lk.  7  :  36. 
Lightfoot  :  Three  anointings:  one  in  Joim,  one  in 
Mt.  and  Mk.,  and  one  in  Lk.  He  denies  any 
contradiction.  Strauss  claims  that  the  whole  record 
has  to  do  with  only  one  case  of  anointing.  Ebrard  an- 
swers Strauss  by  saying  that  tlie  only  resemblance  be- 
tween present  anointing  and  that  in  Lk.  7  :  36  is  that  the 
name  in  both  cases  is  Simon  and  the  fed  of  Jesus  are 
wiped,  with  the  hair.  But  one  Simon  was  a  Pharisee,  the 
other  a  quiet  follower  of  Jesus.  Ebrard  also  suggests  that 
there  was  quite  probably  more  than  one  Simon  in  Pales- 
tine, and  that  it  was  not  impossible  that  the  circumstance 
of  wiping  the  feet  should  be  repeated.  (Ebrard,  pp. 
366-369.) 

Lessons  taught.  1.  The  offering  was  valuable  in  itself — 
"  very  precious."     This  may  apply  both  to  the  box  and 


133 

the  contents.  2.  The  quantity  was  hirge — worth  about 
fifty  dollars.  Farrar  tVoni  this  infers  that  the  family  was 
rich.  Judas  is  indignant  at  the  waste,  but  Jesus  defends 
Mary's  act,  and  declares  that  it  shall  be  a  memorial  of 
her  throughout  the  world.  The  inference  is  that  the 
expression  of  a  lofty  religious  sentiment  justifies  great 
expenditure,  provided  it  is  subordinate  to  deeds  of  charity 
to  our  neighbor. 

Other  suggestions:  a.  Character  of  the  sisters  always 
the  same.  Martha  "serves;"  Mary  sits  at  Jesus'  feet. 
h.  Meaning  of"  this  Gospel."  Meyer  says  the  reference 
is  to  his  death  of  which  he  had  first  spoken.  The  wide 
preaching  of  the  Gospel  is  also  referred  to.  Alford  says 
it  is  the  prediction  of  a  future  written  Gospel.  Notice 
how  literally  the  prediction  concerning  Mary  has  been 
fultille(h  The  rebuke  stimulated  the  malice  of  Judas 
until  he  became  a  traitor. 

§112.  Public  Entrance  into  Jerus.  1.  Time  :  It  was  on 
Sunday,  10th  Nisun.  Bleek  says  Sunday,  and  Robin- 
son, Monday.  That  it  was  a  day  after  a  night  in  Beth- 
any appears  from  John  12:  12.  31eaninf/ of  the  event: 
He  rode  npon  a  carpet  of  branches  and  garments.  It 
was  a  public  acknowledgment  of  his  kingl}'  claims  as  the 
Messiah.  His  hour  had  come.  Hence  the  contrast  with 
liis  previous  conduct  is  very  noticeable.  Important  that 
the  people  should  be  impressed  as  well  as  the  Disciples. 
Appropriate  that  his  last  public  act  should  be  the  clearest 
proof  of  his  Messiahship. 

Sif/nijicance  of  date.  Plis  entrance  on  the  10th  of  the 
month  is  directly  associated  with  the  Law  in  Exodus  12: 
3.  It  was  the  day  when  the  Paschal  Iamb  was  set  apart. 
So  the  Lamb  of  God  sets  his  willing  seal  to  his  own  con- 
secration as  the  sacrifice  for  sin.  Symbolical  acts  :  a. 
Riding  on  an  ass's  colt.  This  was  fulfillment  of  the 
prophecy  in  Zech.  9:9.  b.  It  was  specially"  significant 
of  his  kingship.  Not  on  a  war-horse,  but  on  an  ass  sig- 
nificant of  peace  in  Oriental  countries.  The  animal,  too, 
was  a  colt  "  whereon  never  man  sat."  Like  the  alabaster 
box  unprofaned  by  other  use.  c.  Strewing  branchesand 
garments  also  significant  of  royalty,  d.  The  people  also 
bore  palm-branches  in  their  hands,  as  emblems  of  victory. 

Sudden  Enthusiasm  of  the  People.  This  was  occasioned 
by  his  acceptance   of  their   homage.     Always  ready   to 


134 

support  him  when  the  result  seemed  likely  to  be  their 
restoration  to  temporal  and  political  superiority.  The 
multitudes  quoted  Ps.  118.  This  originally  composed  at 
the  restoration  of  the  Temple,  and  now  applied  to  the 
Messiah  by  the  people,  showing  that  they  regarded  Jesus 
as  one  whom  they  had  looked  for.  "  llosanna  to  the  Son 
of  David."  Jesus  had  never  before  allowed  the  public 
ascription  of  Alessiahship,  because  it  would  rouse  opposi- 
tion before  his  work  was  completed.  But  now  his  work 
was  done.  The  Pharisees,  feeling  scandalized,  said  unto 
him  :  "  Master  rebuke  thy  Disciples."  Jesus  answered 
that  •'  if  these  should  hold  their  peace,  the  stones  would 
immediately  cry  out,"  i.  e.,  to  silence  the  people  would 
be  to  suppress  eternal  truth.  Robinson  introduces  the 
Hosannas  of  the  children,  the  day  after  the  feast  at 
Bethany,  in  this  place.  But  most  Harmonists  follow 
Mt's  order,  and  introduce  this  after  cursing  of  fig-tree. 
Prophecies  fulfilled  :  Isa.  62  :  11  with  Zech.  9  :  9 ;  also 
Gen.  49:  10,  11. 

■  Lamentation  over  Jeriis.  This  scene  is  preserved  by  Lk. 
and  connected  directly  with  public  entrance.  While 
tliey  are  hailing  him  as  king,  he  foresees  the  sad  fate  of 
the  city.  Judicial  blindness  had  seized  the  rulers  and 
the  people.  He  sees  that  tlie  majority  will  rebel  against 
him  and  aid  in  putting  him  to  death  ;  that  the  enemies 
of  the  Jews  will  dig  a  trencli  about  Jerus.,  and  not 
leave  one  stone  upon  another.  (Lk.  19:43,44.)  This 
prophecy  was  literally  fulfilled,  for  the  Roman  army  was 
encamped  on  the  very  spot  where  this  i)rediction  was 
uttered. 

The  Pharisees  were  ready  to  give  up  in  despair  when 
they  saw  Christ's  popularity.  Effect  on  the  people  :  The 
whole  city  was  moved — iasio&rj^i.  e.,  shaken.  Christ  thus 
had  an  opportunity  to  finish  his  work,  for  his  enemies 
no  less  than  his  friends  were  involved  in  the  excitement. 
Road  by  which  he  entered:  Mount  of  Olives  not  a  single 
hill,  but  a  ridge  with  three  summits.  Three  roads  cross 
it.  The  nortliern  one  is  steej);  the  second  is  half  way 
down  the  mountain  ;  and  the  third,  which  Christ  prob- 
ably took,  and  "which  sweeps  round  the  southern 
shoulder  of  the  central  mass,"  is  the  main  road  for  all 
kinds  of  travel.     On  this  road  tliere  is  a  projecting  n)ass 


135 

of  rock  around  which  the  road  suddenly  turns  to  the 
north,  and  then  the  whole  city  bursts  suddenly  upon  the 
vision.  This  angle  has  been  fixed  upon  as  the  place 
where  Jesus  stood  as  he  wept  over  the  city. 

Location,  of  places :  Bethany  signifying  House  of 
Dates,  is  from  Ih  to  2  miles  S.  E.  of  Jerus,  Its  modern 
name  is  Lazarieh,  which  thus  continues  to  bear  witness 
to  the  great  miracle  wrought  there.  Now  a  small  village 
of  some  twenty  houses,  occupied  by  Bedouin  Arabs. 
Bethphage,  House  of  Unripe  Figs,  according  to  Lightfoot 
was  a  suburb  of  Jerus.,  though  hardly  an}'  two  opinions 
agree.     (Andrews,  pp.  404-5.) 

Objections:  1.  The  Syn.  introduce  the  narrative  as 
though  the  last  journey  were  continuous.  Jolm  says 
that  Jesus  passed  the  night  at  Bethany,  and  the  "  next 
day  "  went  to  Jerus.  Ans  :  John  gives  the  natural  order 
of  events  while  the  Syn.  record  simply  the  connection 
of  events.  Ebrard  denies  that  it  is  any  where  stated  that 
Jesus  went  to  Jerus.  the  same  day  he  left  Jericho,  as 
Strauss  assumes  in  order  to  prove  an  alleged  contradic- 
tion. 2.  If  Jesus  started  from  Bethany  as  John  says, 
then  he  could  not  have  sent  there  for  the  animals.  Ans  : 
Who  says  he  did  send  there  for  the  animals?  The  "vil- 
lage "  referred  to  by  Mt.  and  Mk.  refers  not  to  one  of 
those  named,  but  to  another  on  the  way  to  Jerus.  And, 
as  Ebrard  suggests,  why  could  he  not  send  forward  for 
the  colt  after  he  had  gone  some  distaui^e  from  Bethany? 
(Vide  Ebrard,  pp.  371-2  on  the  expression  "drew  nigh.") 

3.  Mode  of  obtaining  the  animals  supposes  a  mythical 
origin  for  the  narrative.  Ans:  The  objection  is  trilling. 
The  method  chosen  is  in  fulfillment  of  prophecy.  Some 
suppose  the  owner  of  the  animals  believed  in  tlie  Lord; 
others,  that  a  pre-arrangement  had  been  made  with  him. 

4.  It  is  said  that  Mt.  (21  :  7)  represents  Jesus  as  riding 
on  both  animals.  Ans  :  A  similar  expression  is  used  in 
Acts  23  :  24.  But  nobody  infers  that  Paul  rode  several 
animals  at  once.  (Ebrard,  p.  372.)  Christ's  entrance  is 
alleged  to  have  been  an  attempt  to  excite  revolution. 
This  is  an  old  charge.  It  is  refuted  by  the  fact  that  after 
the  triumphal  entrance  he  immediately  withdraws  to 
Bethany,  thereby,  as  some  suppose,  signifying  that  he 
left  Jerus.  to  its  fate. 


136 

§113.  Cursiiifi  the  Fifi-tree ;  Chan  sin  g  the  Temple.  Bleek 
j3nts  these  events  on  Sunday,  lOtli  Nisan  ;  Wies,  on  the 
11th  and  Rob.  on  the  12th.  Difference  between  Mt.  and 
Mk.  very  sliglit.  Mt.  puts  the  events  in  their  natural 
connection,  without  noticins^  the  division  of  time.  Puts 
cleansing  of  Temple  immediately  after  entrance,  and 
cursing  of  Fig-tree  next  morning.  (Mt.  21  :  17-18.) 
This  tree  often  planted  by  the  way-side  for  its  shade  and 
because  "  the  dust  was  thought  to  facifitate  its  growth." 
Its  fruit  was  common  property.  Being  hungry  he  ap- 
proaclied  this  tree  whose  rich  foliage  promised  fruit. 
Finding  nothing  but  leaves,  Jesus  said,  '•  Let  no  fruit 
grow  on  thee  henceforward  forever." 

Objection?:  1.  It  is  said  if  he  had  known  there  were  no 
figs  he  would  not  have  sought  them.  If  he  did  not 
know  then  he  is  not  omniscient.  Ans. :  The  objection 
assumes  that  he  was  bound  to  tell  all  he  knew.  2.  AVhy 
did  he  expect  fruit  at  this  season  ?  Mk.  says,  "  for  the 
time  of  figs  was  not  yet."  Ans.:  a.  "It  was  not  the 
time  of  year,  but  the  strii<ing  qaantittj  of  leaves  for  the  time 
of  year,  which  led  to  the  expectation  that  there  would 
certain)}'  be  figs  upon  the  tree,"  says  Ebrard.  h.  Al- 
though not  the  general  season  for  figs  as  Mk.  states, 
"  there  is  to  this  day,  in  Palestine,  a  kind  of  white  or 
early  fig  which  ripens  in  spring,  and  much  before  the 
ordinary  or  black  fig."  Furthermore,  the  autumn  figs 
often  remained  on  tlie  trees  through  the  winter,  until 
the  new  spring  leaves  had  come.  (Farrar,  Vol.  II.,  pp. 
213-4.) 

3.  It  is  charged  that  this  act  was  not  only  the  destruc- 
tion of  a  shade  tree  but  also  an  expression  of  unworthy 
anger,  Ans.  :  The  lesson  taught  is  of  far  more  import- 
ance than  the  tree.  Farrar  asks,  "  Is  it  a  crime  under 
a???y  circumstances  to  destroy  a  useless  tree?  If  not,  is  it 
more  a  crime  to  do  so  by  miracle  ?"  This  is  the  only  in- 
stance of  a  miracle  of  Judgment.  The  act  was  a  sym- 
bolic one.  The  tree  with  its  luxurious  leaves  was  a  type 
of  the  Jewish  Church,  outwardly  fiourishing,  but  inward- 
ly barren.  It  was  therefore  destroyed.  Tlie  act  is  related 
on  the  one  hand  to  the  lamentation  over  Jerus.,  on  the 
other,  to  the  parable  following,  (Farrar  Vol.  IL,  pp.  215- 
16.)     Ebrard  says  Strauss's  conjecture   that    Christ  was 


137 

moved  only  by  anger  at  not  finding  any  figs,  "  is  too 
\v(n'tliless  and  wicked  to  have  sprung  from  anything 
but  utter  insanity." 

Cleansing  the  l^ernple.  Symbolically,  this  act  is  the 
counterpart  of  the  preceding.  Christ  here  assumes  pos- 
session of  the  Temple  in  anticipation  of  the  future  reign 
over  the  church,  and  his  final  success.  It  was  also  the 
manifestation  of  his  Messiahship,  as  the  Pharisees  plainly 
understood.  For  they  said,  "  By  what  authority  doest 
thou  these  things  ?"  The  whole  Temple  services  were 
fulfilled  in  Christ,  who  is  God  with  us.  Temple  was  the 
place  where  God  then  met  with  his  people.  Now,  in 
Christ  God  meets  with  them.  In  John  2  :  16,  it  is  writ- 
ten "  make  not  my  Father's  house  a  house  of  merchan- 
dise." In  Mk.  11 :  17,  "  My  house  shall  be  called  of  all 
nations  the  house  of  prayer."  These  two  passages  gene- 
rally considered  to  form  a  climax.  Emphasis  in  hitter 
[tassage  is  on  "  all  nations,"  making  the  final  univer- 
sality of  ChristiMuity  prominent.  The  second  point  is 
the  spiritual  relation  of  the  people  of  God.  John  2:  13 
points  to  reformation;  Mk.  11  :  17  to  judicial  judgment. 
Jews  must  be  driven  out  to  make  room  for  others.  The 
rulers  are  again  enraged  and  seek  to  destroy  him,  but 
fail  in  their  purpose.  This  Monday  was  a  day  of  great 
triumph,  for,  despite  the  Pharisees,  he  taught  all  day  in 
the  Temple  and  at  night  went  out  of  the  city. 

§114.  Th".  barren  Fig-tree  loithers  away.  On  the  way  to 
the  city,  in  the  morning,  the  Disciples  saw  that  the  fig- 
tree  had  withered  away.  '•  The  quick  eye  of  Peter  was 
the  first  to  notice  it."  Instead  of  explaining  its  mean- 
ing, Jesus  gives  them  a  suggestive  lesson  on  "Faith,  and 
the  encouragement  to  prayer. 

§115.  Authoritgof  Christ  questioned.  Having  arrived  at 
the  Temple  Christ  walked  about  and  taught  as  if  he  had 
sole  authority.  The  second  step  in  events  of  the  week 
is  found  in  events  of  this  day.  Christ  does  not  yield 
possession  of  the  Temple  to  force.  When  he  goes  it  is 
voluntarily.  Here  we  meet  with  efii'orts  of  the  priests  to 
destroy  his  influence.  It  was  necessary  that  his  power 
should  be  thus  tested,  so  that  the  subsequent  surrender 
of  himself  should  be  clearly  voluntary.  The  moral  tri- 
umph of  this  day  is  the  preface  of  his  trial.     Notice  1. 


138 

The  assault  of  the  Sanhedrim  upon  Ins  authority.  It  is 
followed  by  three  parables — the  two  sons,  tiie  wicked 
husbaiidnien,  and  the  marriage  of  the  king's  son.  All 
set  forth  the  judgment  to  come.  2.  Crafty  questions 
intended  to  involve  hira  in  ditficulty  with  civil  authori- 
ties, and  break  down  his  influence.  Attempts  by  Phari- 
sees, Sadducees  and  lawyers.  3.  Long  judicial  discourses 
against  tlie  Pharisees.  4.  The  prophetic  discourses  con- 
cerning destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the  linal  judgment 
pronounced  upon  his  departure  irom  the  temple.  (Mt. 
25.)  This  discourse  is  the  last  of  his  public  teaching, 
except  the  one  on  occasion  of  the  visit  of  the  Greeks. 
Jno.  12  :  20-50.  This  day  has  been  called  the  great 
prophetic  day.  Disproportionate  lengtli  of  narrative 
accounted  for  by  fact  tliat  it  is  the  day  of  final  teaching. 
Result  of  the  consultation  of  the  Sanhedrim  :  They 
question  him  concerning  his  authority.  It  was  ofiicial ; 
put  to  him  as  soon  as  he  reached  the  teniple,  and  involved 
1.  The  fact  that  the  rulers  were  divinely  appointed,  and 
that  Christ  was  acting  in  opposition  to  them.  2.  Showed 
an  appreciation  of  his  true  Messianic  claims.  Hence  it 
v^^as  a  well  chosen  question,  for  the  people  were  unwilling 
for  any  other  than  a  temporal  Messiah.  The  Pharisees  had 
thought  to  receive  the  answer,  "  I  am  the  Christ."  But 
if  question  was  subtle,  the  answer  shows  Divine  wisdom. 
"  The  baptism  of  John,  was  it  from  heaven  or  of  men  ?" 
Alleged  that  this  answer,  like  their  question,  a  trap,  and 
unworthy  of  Christ.  But  it  is  no  evasion  ;  for  1.  The 
Pharisees  put  the  issue  between  them  on  the  ground  of 
authority.  2.  If  John  had  divine  authority  then  his 
record  of  Jesus  was  a  sufficient  answer  to  their  question. 
Tlie  answer  is  at  same  time  an  exposure  of  the  hypo- 
critical pretence  of  the  rulers  of  their  zeal  for  authority. 
They  are  obliged  to  confess  their  ignorance.  Thne 
parables  concerning  judgment  follow  closeh'  on  this 
defeat.  Lesson  taught  by  them  all  is  :  rejection  of  Christ 
by  the  nation  transferred  its  privileges  and  blessings  to 
the  Gentiles.  As-sociation  of  the  three  kept  up  in  the 
figure.  Parable  of  two  sons.  Makes  his  enemies  judge 
themselves.  He  sets  forth  their  sins,  liypocrisy,  unbelief, 
and  disobedience.  Primary  application  was  either  to 
Jews  and  Gentiles,  or  to  Phiirisees  and  Publicans.  Same 
principles  involved. 


1S9 

§116.  The  Wicked  Husbandmen.  The  disobedience  was 
national,  and  not  negative  but  active  persecution  and 
consequent  judg-ment.  The  figure  of  vineyard  is  sus- 
tained—there conduct  was  personal,  liere  national.  Sin 
was  not  only  in  lefusing  the  Lord  his  vineyard,  but  in 
killing  his  son.  The  vineyard  vvas  therefore  taken  from 
them  and  given  to  the  Gentiles.  Shows  the  love  of  God 
to-  his  church  ;  the  exaltation  of  Christ,  Ps.  118.  *'  The 
stone  which  the  builders  rejected  is  become  the  head  of 
the  corner."  By  striking  transition  Christ  depicts  a 
negataw.  ]\\(\gme\\X.  "Whosoever  shall  fall,  &c.,"  and  then 
a  positive  judgment  "on  whomsoever  it  shall  fall,  &c." 
The  verb  here  rneans.to  winnmv,  but  in  our  version  figure 
of  stone  is  retained  and  is  probably  correct.  Pers'cmal 
application  of  parable  to  Pharisees  is  made  in  Mt.  21  : 
43.  and  results  in  an  attempt  by  them  to  assault  him. 

§117.  Marriage  of  the  King's  Son.  Figure  retained  ;  suc- 
cessive missions,  ill-treatment  and  refusal.  The  previous 
parables  dwelt  on  failure  of  duty,  this  teaches  forfeiture 
of  privileges  only  alluded  to  at  close  of  last.  The  <^race 
of  God  more  prominent  in  this.  Main  reference  is  tt)  the 
calling  of  the  Gentiles.  Should  be  carefully  studied  with, 
and  distinguished  from,  parable  of  the  Great  Supper  in 
Lk.  14.  Point  of  view  different  in  Mt.  Calling  of  Gen- 
tiles here  cliecking  of  Pharisaic  pride.  Climactic  relation 
of  two.  Mt.  closes  with  entrance  of  man  without  wed- 
ding garment.  Showing  that  personal,  not  national 
qualifications  are  required.  Publicans  and  harlots  might 
otherwise  be  led  to  think  they  were  heirs  of  the  king- 
dom. Baptism,  Charity,  Faith,  Christian  life— a  new 
heart  indispensable.  Element  of  mercy  in  all  this  sever- 
ity of  Chiist — warning  men  of  danger  common  to  all  and 
into  whicth  the  Jews  had  especially^fallen. 

§118.  Question  of  Pharisees  concerning  Tribute.  The  Phari- 
sees thus  baffled  retire  and  take  counsel.  Renew  attack, 
intending  this  time  to  embroil  Christ  with  Pilate— send 
spies,  literally  perjurers  with  instructions  to  be  respect- 
ful in  manner.  Dilemma— he  must  ofiehd  either  people 
or  the  government.  They  expected  a  negative  answer 
which  would  justify  a  charge  .of  rebellion.  Lk.  5:  20. 
Notice  hypocrisy  of  rulers— this  decision  expected  of 
them  by  Christ  as  basis  of  a  charge,  was  to  them  a  mat- 


140 

ter  of  conscience — independence  being  a  part  of  their 
religion.  Question  also  touched  point  of  contrast  be- 
tween his  and  their  doctrine  of  the  Messianic  kingdom. 
These  two  questions  involved  whole  case  of  Pharisees — 
containing  tlie  two  charges  against  him  at  his  trial  of 
blasphemy  and  sedition  — they  wanted  him  to  a\ow  Iris 
Divinity  and  also  to  oppose  the  Government ;  the  second, 
a  natural  sequel  of  first,  if  you  have  such  authority,  how 
reconcile  it  with  Csesar's.  But  he  replies  by  calling  for 
coin — the  coinage  of  money  is  prerogative  of  the  ruler 
in  all  countries.  He  recognizes  distinction  between  two 
spheres  of  duty  and  that  they  are  not  inconsistent.  Pre- 
cise relation  not  here  stated.  His  answer  surprises 
questioners,  silences  them,  yet  without  ofience. 

§119.  Question  of  the  Sadducces.  Probably  they  came  at 
the  instigation  of  Sanhedrim.  Reply  to  previous  ques- 
tion was  on  their  side  and  they  try  now  to  evoke  a  reply 
against  the  Pharisees.  This  question  dift'ers  in  spirit 
from  previous  one  which  tho'  hypocritical  was  serious 
and  important — \.\\\9,  frivolous .  Sadducees  at  first  denied 
tradition  simply  ;  then  certain  portions  of  SS.,  and  finally 
denied  the  resurrection  and  future  punishment — because 
of  their  sceptical  views.  Their  question,  based  on  Deut. 
25  :  5  wliich  as  law  now  obsolete  on  account  of  loss  of 
land  boundaries,  was  not  a  real  one.  Impossible  case 
of  woman  married  to  seven  brothers.  Treats  question 
as  unworthy  of  notice,  proves  resurrection  from  E.x.  3  :  6, 
"  I  am  the  God  of  thy  father  &c."  He  is  not  God  of 
dead  l)nt  of  living.  No  marriage  relation  after  resurrec- 
tion. 

Strauss  cliarges  Christ  with  rabbinical  finesse.  1.  The 
words  in  Ex.  simpl}-  meant  continuance  of  covenant  rela- 
tions with  Abraham's  posterity.  2.  Admitting  Avords 
refer  to  future  state,  they  prove  not  resurrection  but 
immortality  of  the  soul.  Hence  proof  is  irrelevant. 
Ans.  to  first  objection,  a.  Christ,  some  say,  not  arguing, 
but  simply  stating  the  meaning  of  passage.  /;.  More 
commonly  held  that  he  do.es  argue.  The  relation  between 
God  and  the  Patriarchs  was  a  covenant  relation  and 
therefore  an  enduring  relation  of  force  in  both  worlds. 
Ans.  to  second  objection.  It  is  a  complete  answer  to  Sad- 
ducees, because  their  denial  of  resurrection  was  based 


141 

upon  denial  of  innnortality  of  soul  and  greater  includes 
the  less.  Effect  on  multitude  great,  scribes  even  exclaim, 
"  Master,  well  said."  Parties  divided.  Comj».  with  Acts 
20. 

§120.  Laniyer's  question-as  to  greatest  commandment.  Nat- 
urally follows  previous  one,  which  had  to  do  with  the 
law.  "^  The  dilemma?  Two  views.  1.  The  question  was 
much  discussed  among  various  parties  of  the  Jews,  and 
any  commandment  specified  by  Christ  would  offend  the 
advocates  of  all  the  others.  S'tier  quotes  from  one  of  the 
Rabbins,  that  Moses  enjoined  365  prohibitions  and  248 
commands — in  all  613. 

2.  A  profound  explanation  is  that  attributed  by  Schaff 
and  Lange,  (really  as  old  as  Chrysostom).  The  tenqjta- 
tion  lay  in  the  o[)portunity  given  our  Lord  to  assert  his 
own  Divinity.  They  exi^ected  him  to  fix  on  the  unity  of 
God  as  the  most  important  O.  T.  truth,  and  the  command 
to  love  him,  the  greatest.  Had  he  done  so  he  would  liave 
given  them  an  opening  by  which  to  lead  him  to  assert 
his  equality  with  God.  That  this  is  true  view  appears 
from  Christ's  counter  question,  "  How  could  David  call 
him  Lord  who  is  his  Son."  Christ's  answer  asserts  the 
unity  of  the  law  as  opposed  to  the  divisions  of  the  Jews, 
and  the  true  principle  of  obedience  as  love  to  God, 
whence  flows  love  to  man.  The  lawyer  is  struck  with 
conviction — "  Master  thou  hast  well  said." 

§12L  Christ's  question  to  the  Pharisees.  "  How  does 
David  call  him  Lord  ?"  This  is  not  as  some  assert  a  mere 
evasion.  It  is  really  the  climax  of  the  whole  disputation. 
To  perceive  this  we  must  bear  in  mind  the  two  charges 
made  at  his  trial,  blasphemy  and  treason.  Both  had  been 
implied  in  the  question  concerning  his  authority  and  the 
pacing  of  tribute,  and  both  are  best  answered  here. 
Christ  calls  his  enemies  to  the  main  point  in  dispute, 
"  What  think  ye  of  Christ."  Quotes  Ps.  110— admitted 
by  Jews  to  be  Messianic — they  do  not  deny  his  Davidic 
descent.  Christ  shows  that  0.  T.  declares  him  to  be  very 
God  and  very  man.  He  is  David's  son  and  yet  David's 
Lord.  By  introduction  of  this  element,  the  greatest 
commandment  of  the  Law  is  fully  stated.  The  effect  was 
— the  common  peoide  heard  him  gladly.  His  opponents 
cease  their  questioning.     Notice :  the  statement,  "  No  man 


142 

durst  ask  him  any  more  questions,"  is  made  by  each  of 
theEvangelists,  but  at  different  points  :  Mt.  22  :  46, — after 
Christ's  counter  questions  ;  Mk.  12  :  34 — after  Lawyer's 
question;  Lk.  20:  40 -after  Sadducees'  question.  This 
ditference  not  contradictory  ;  for  connection  is  really  the 
same.  Account  of  woman  taken  in  adultery,  John  8  :  1- 
11,  inserted  here  by  Lange.  But  external  authority  is 
against  the  genuineness  of  the  record. 

§122.  Judicial  discourse  against  the  Pharisees.  The  ap- 
propriate close  of  the  struggle  appears  in  the  denunciatory 
discourse.  Christ  sums  up  all  that  he  has  said  against 
tlie  Pharisees  during  his  ministr3^  A  considerable  part 
of  the  discourse  appears  in  Lk.  II.  How  is  the  resem- 
blance to  be  explained?  Tioo  theories.  1.  The  same 
language  could  have  been  twice  uttered.  It  is  likely 
therefore  that  one  Evangelist  borrowed  from  the  other  — 
or  su[)plemented  by  memory  from  other  discourses.  2. 
Bot!i  passages  are  historical.  No  warrant  for  any  other 
view — appropriateness  of  passage  here  is  evident.  Did- 
sio7is  of  the  discourse  in  Mt.  vs.  1-13  are  occupied  with  a 
statement  of  the  true  character  of  the  Pharisees — desire 
of  praise,  uppermost  rooms,  greeting  in  the  market,  &c. 

§123.  Discourse  continued.  Woes  upon  the  Pharisees. 
Series  of  7  or  8.  These  are  the  severest  words  ever 
uttered  by  Christ.  AH  previous  blood  shed  from  Abel 
to  present  required  of  this  generation.  Jews  guilty  of 
same  sins  as  their  fathers  and  were  to  suffer  for  sins  of 
fathers.  The  sins  of  Pharisees  were  national  and  brought 
national  disaster.  Yet  Christ  shows  his  mercy  and  love 
in  his  lamentation  over  Jerusalem'  vs.  37,  38.  "  Blessed 
is  he  that  cometh  "  refers  to  second  advent  or  resurrec- 
tion of  Christ. 

Counterpart  of  Sermon  on  Mount,  often  noticed.  In 
that,  we  have  delineation  of  character  of  those  who  re- 
ceive the  kingdom  and  statement  of  consequent  bless- 
ings. In  this,  a  description  of  those  who  reject  the 
kingdom  and  a  recital  of  consequent  woes. 

§124.  The  Widow's  Mite.  From  connection  in  Mt.  it 
is  inferred  that  departure  from  the  Temple  was  imme- 
diately after  close  of  the  judicial  discourse.  In  depai-t- 
ing  our  Lord  has  one  warm  glance  at  [»iety  of  O.  T. 
Incident  here  recorded  is  in  contrast  with  preceding  dis- 


143 

course.  Sitting  clown  to  watch  the  worshippers  casting 
gifts  into  the  treasury,  he  sees  a  widow  cast  in  two 
lepta,  less  than  one-tifth  of  a  cent.  Bengel  remarks  that 
light  is  thrown  upon  her  act  by  her  throwing  in  two  lepta, 
for  she  might  have  kept  one.  Christ  commends  her 
sacrificing  spirit. 

§125.  Visit  of  certain  Greeks.  John  12:  20-26  is  perti- 
nent illustration  of  supplementary  character  of  John's 
gospels.  Notice:  1.  Connection  in  John — he  records 
notiii ng  of  long  discourses  against  the  Pharisees.  But 
a  knowledge  of  it  is  essential  to  the  understanding  of 
this  event.  John  therefore  puts  it  in  contrast  with  the 
bitterness  of  the  Pharisees  as  recorded  in  the  Synoptists. 
2.  Connection  in  harmony  suggests  similar  idea.  At 
the  close  of  the  day  of  conflict  with  Pharisees,  the 
Greeks  appear  as  the  represcfitatives  of  the  Gentiles  and 
accept  that  kingdom  wliich  the  Jews  reject.  Many  har- 
monists refuse  to  separate  this  event  from  connection  in 
which  it  stands  in  John,  making  it  take  place  on  the 
day  of  Christ's  public  entrance.  Lange  arbitrarily  places 
it  on  same  day  the  Temple  was  cleansed.  But  it  comes 
in  most  naturally  when  he  leaves  the  Temple  finally. 
Were  the  Greeks  allowed  to  see  Jesus  ?  Some  think 
that  the  interview  was  deferred  until  after  the  Resurrec- 
tion, but  there  would  be  no  force  in  Christ's  reply  to  the 
disciples,  if  the  Greeks  were  not  present.  The  incident 
an  appropriate  close  of  the  day  of  conflict. 

§126.  John's  reflections  upon  the  unbelief  of  the  Jews: 
John  12  :  S7-50.  Verses  44-50  are  last  words  of  Jesus 
or  a  summing  up  of  the  Evangelists,  because  1.  They 
are  introduced  after  Christ  went  away  and  hid  himself,  as 
if  the}' were  something  remembered.  2.  Jesus  stood  and 
cried,  which  implies  a  great  audience. 

§§127-130.  Great  Prophetic  Discourse  on  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem,  the  end  of  the  world  and  the  second  advent. 
Having  kept  possession  of  the  Temple  for  three  days  and 
having  .been  rejected  by  the  Jews,  Christ  now  leaves  it 
finally.  Seated  upon  the  Mt.  of  Olives  his  disciples 
come  to  him  and  speak  concerning  the  Temple.  His 
public  teaching  had  ended,  but  there  were  two  import- 
ant instructions  to  disciples.'  1.  The  outward  progress 
of  the  kino;dom  of  Messiah  until  the  second  advent.     2. 


144 

John  14 — 17  ehaps.  o;ive  the  inward  and  spiritual  condi- 
tions by  which  the  outward  triumph  was  to  be  secured. 
Such  instructions  naturally  private,  and  necessary  for 
completion  of  his  church's  pre[iaration.  In  the  O.  T. 
prophecy,  the  advent,  the  outpourino;  of  the  spirit,  the 
foundation  of  the  church  and  the  tinal  triumph  of  the 
Messiah's  kingdom  are  as  a  whole  connected  together. 
To  the  O.  T.  prophecies  concerning  himself,  he  luid,  at 
different  times,  added  his  suffering,  death  and  resurrec- 
tion, the  persecution  of  his  disciples  and  the  necessity  of 
patient  self-denying  labor.  The  great  prophecy  belongs 
therefore  to  the  transition  stage  in  the  development  of 
prophecy.  It  stands  related  both  to  the  O.  T.  prophecies 
and  those  of  Paul  and  the  Apocalypse.  Two  things 
must  be  always  remembered  :  1.  The  main  design  of 
the  discourse  was  practical,  to  induce  patient  watch- 
fulness. Hence  a  large  part  of  Mt's  25  ch.  is  in  form  of 
parables  enforcing  this  duty.  Signs  of  the  advent  given 
are  all  negative.  The  disciples  are  to  be  on  their  guard 
against  misunderstanding  them.  2.  The  indefinite  con- 
ceptions of  disciples  connecting  the  advent  and  the  end 
of  the  world  largely  condition  the  form  of  our  Lord's 
discourse.  The  combination  of  these  events  is  the  great 
difficulty  of  the  prophecy.  Christ  says  "  this  generation 
shall  not  pass  away  before  all  be  fulfilled,"  The  dis- 
ciples, questions  contain  three  periods  according  to  the 
pre-millenial  theory:  1.  When  shall  these  things  be? 
2.  What  shall  be  the  sign  of  thy  coming?  3.  And  of 
the  end  of  the  world. 

It  is  best  to  find  only  two  periods  with  two  correspond- 
ing questions.  1.  When  shall  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem be?  and,  2.  When  shall  be  the  time  of  thy  coming? 
with  which  the  disciples  naturally  associated  the  endof 
the  world. 

Relates  other  Parables — the  stewards,  the  virgins  and 
the  talents.  Parable  of  virgins  teaches  not  only  duty  of 
watchfulness  but  of  watchful  preparation.  Bridegroom 
delaying  his  coming  sliows  that  the  time  of  advent  is 
distant.  A  current  pre-millenial  theory  encounters  in 
this  parable  a  serious  difficulty.  Strauss,  Alford  and 
others  make  it  refer  to  Christ's  coming  at  the  first  Resur- 
rection.    Bride  is  restored  Jewish  Church  ;  the  vircfins 


145 

are  the  Gentiles  who  will  accompany  him.  Some  hold 
that  the  exclusion  of  virgins  is  not  final. 

Parable  <>/  (he  Talents.  This  adds  fVuitfnlness  to  watch- 
ful prei)aration.  A  close  relation  between  parable  of 
King's  Son  and  the  Great  Supper.  So  this  resembles 
that  of  the  Pounds  given  in  Lk.  The  diitei'ences  are  in 
the  sums  given  and  the  returns  obtained.  In  Lk.  equal 
sums  produce  ditterent  results.  In  Mt.  the  sums  are 
different,  the  increase  is  proportionate  and  the  rewards 
are  equal.  Taken  together  they  leach  that  the  gifts  of 
Heaven  are  all  of  grace,  but  tliat  men  are  to  be  rewarded 
according  to  their  tidelitj'.  In  verses  31-46  we  have  the 
last  words  concei'ning  the  judgment  day,  where  we  find 
ground  upon  which  rewards  and  punishments  are  to  be 
based— the  treatment  of  his  people. 

Is  the  discourse  parabolic  or  pi-oplietic?  Arguments 
for  the  former:  1.  Its  position,  following  so  many  para- 
bles. 2.  Its  figures — the  goats  and  sheep,  arul  their 
separation,  the  colloquy  between  the  good  and  the  evil 
and  the  Judge.  For  its  prophetic  chai-acter  and  literal 
interpretation  :  1.  The  language  is  didactic  and  not 
figurative  and  the  form  is  changed  from  the  parabolic  to 
the  prophetic.  2.  The  king  of  tlie  previous  parables  is  not 
mentioned— prominent  figure  is  the  Son  of  Man.  But  if 
this  be  a  prophecy  wdiich  judgment  is  meant  ?  of  the 
elect  or  of  the  non-elect  ?  or  is  it  the  General  Judgment? 
The  Millenarians  as  Stier,  Alford,  &c.,  say  it  is  judgment 
of  the  eOu/^  as  distinguished  tVom  that  of  the  ex^.r^zoc,  and 
give  these  reasons  :  1.  Test  of  judgment  is  not  faith  but 
charity.  Christians  are  however  to  be  judged  by  their 
faith.  Ans  :  The  works  mentioned  are  expressions  of 
faith — the  outward  duty  is  taken  for  the  inward  state. 
2.  The  parties  judged  are  self-righteous  "Lord  when 
saw  we,  &c.,"  Ans.:  The  language  used  is  in  reality  an 
expression  of  humility.  Is  it  the  final  judgment  ?  The 
majority  of  authorities  take  this  view.  The  prophecy  is 
the  fitting  climax  of  his  teaching  concerning  his  king- 
dom. 

§131.  Conspiracy  of  Rulers  and  Treason  of  Judas.  The 
peritlexitj  of  the  jtriests  stands  in  contrast  with  Christ's 
foreknowledge.  They  had  concluded  they  could  not 
take  him  at  the  feast,  but  Jesus  knew  that  he  was  to  die. 


146 

Mt.  26  :  1,  2  contain  a  distinct  prediction  of  the  ernci- 
fixioii.  The  baffled  rulers  hold  council  and  seek  liow 
they  may  acconiplisli  his  death  by  craft.  Opportu- 
nity for  them— Judas  appears.  They  are  rejoiced  and 
offer  him  a  bribe.  The  traitor  sets  h'imself  to  watch  an 
opportunity  to  betray  his  master  without  incitinsi;  resist- 
ance. Opportunity  is  offered  sooner  than  lie  expected. 
The  Synoptists  go  back  to  the  gupper  at  Bethany  to  ac- 
count for  his  appearance.  His  hypocrisy  was  there  exposed 
and  by  his  malice  the  purpose  of  God  was  accomplished. 
When  (lid  Judas  //o  to  the  Priests?  If  he  went  to  them 
on  Saturday  night  after  the  Supper  he  was  in  collusion 
with  tliem  during  the  prophetic  day  ;  or  he  may  have 
formed  the  design  in  liis  mind  during  the  feast,  and  have 
held  an  interview  with  the  priests  on  Tuesday  night  when 
they  were  enraged  by  Christ's  discourses,  aiid'ready  to 
make  a  bargain  with  him.  Or  if  Robinson's  arrange- 
ment be  correct,  placing  the  Supper  on  Tuesday  night, 
then  Judas  was  with  the  priests  on  Wednesday.  The 
clioice  is  between  the  two  first  views.  AVhcn  did  con- 
sultation of  priests  occur,  Tuesday  or  We(biesday  ?  It 
depends  upon  the  method  of  counting  the  "two  "days" 
spoken  of  by  Christ.  Some,  as  Afford  and  Ellicott, 
count  inclusively,  making  it  Wednesday  night.  The  more 
common  way  is  to  count  exclusively.  Two  days  before 
Thursday  brings  it  then  to  Tuesday'evening.  The  plot- 
ting was  at  same  time  as  the  discourses."  This  leaves 
Wednesday  as  a  day  of  rest  in  Bethany,  a  feature  of  the 
history  which  Robinson's  scheme  leaves  out.  The  Con- 
sultation of  the  Pharisees  was  informal,  and  held  in  the 
court  of  Caiaphas — tradition  says  at  his  country  house 
at  the  top  of  the  Hill  of  Evil  Counsel,  where  monu- 
ment of  Annas  the  father-in-law  of  Caiaphas  is  found. 
The  price  of  hctrmjal,  recorded  by  Mt.  oidy,  was  30  [.ieces 
of  silver,  about  $18,  the  price  of  a  slave,  Ex.  21  :  32. 
Zech.  11 :  12,  13.  Smallness  of  price  shows  contempt  of 
rulers  for  Christ.  Character  and  motives  of  Judas.  His 
name  Iscariot  is  variously  explained.  Some  make  it 
mean,  man  with  a  bag  ;'  others,  strangling,  alluding 
to  his  death.  But  most  commonly,  ^ish  '^Kerioth,  a 
man  of  Kerioth,  a  place  in  South  of  Judea.  His 
office    among   tlie    Twelve    was    steward    or    almoner. 


147 

(Lk.  8  :  1-3.)  The  money  entrusted  to  him  was  not  only 
for  the  support  of  Christ  and  his  disciples  but  for  charity. 

Difficulties:  1.  Strauss  and  Meyer  say  that  Synoptisls 
and  John  do  not  harmonize — former  say  Judas  went  to 
the  Priests  immediately  after  the  feast  in  Bethany,  the 
latter,  after  Satan  had  entered  into  him  at  the  Supper. 
Ans  :  According  to  the  accounts  Satan  entered  into  him 
at  different  times.  Tlie  objection  takes  for  granted  that 
Judas  cculd  not  have  dallied  with  an  evil  thought  for 
several  days.  All  that  John  says  is  that  his  sin  was  in 
consequence  of  the  entrance  of  Satan.  2.  It  is  alleged 
that  tlie  Gospels  do  not  furnish  an  adequate  motivefor 
Judas'  treachery — the  amount  paid  is  too  small  even  for 
the  priests  to  offer,  much  less  for  Judas  to  accept.  Ans : 
The  objection  does  not  properly  estimate  either  tlie 
power  or  the  extent  of  covetousness.  The  smallest  sum 
is  sutKcient  incentive  for  the  greatest  crime  when  it  is 
once  admitted  as  a  motive  power. 

Contrast  with  31ary  :  At  the  Supper,  the  disciples  com- 
plained of  the  waste  occasioned  by  the  anointing  of 
Christ.  In  succeeding  verses  Synoptists  go  on  to  show 
tliat  Judas  sold  Christ  for  30  i>ieces  of  silver,  one-third 
the  cost  of  anointing.  Contrast  not  fortuitous.  John 
says  Judas  did  not  care  for  the  poor,  but  complained  of 
the  waste  because  he  was  a  thief  and  had  tlie  bag.  John 
therefore  puts  character  of  Judas  on  a  still  lower  level, — 
not  only  covetous  but  dishorn st.  3.  It  is  said  that  the 
rebuke  of  Jesus  was  too  mild  to  cause  resentment  ;  i.  e. 
Ju(his  u'as  too  bad  a  man  to  be  offended  at  a  mild  rebuke. 
Ans:  To  be  exposed  for  meanness  before  a  company  is 
not  pleasant  however-  mild  the  language  of  rebuke. 
Dilemma :  Did  Jesus  know  the  character  of  Judas  when 
be  chose  him  for  a  disciple  ?  John  says  he  knew  his  true 
character  a  year  before.  If  so  how  then  explain  Mt.  26: 
24?  If  Jesus  knew  him,  wliy  did  he  appoint  him  trea- 
surer and  place  him  in  way  of  temptation  ?  Why  did  he 
choose  him  as  a  disciple  at  all,  and  wliy  did  he  bear  so 
long  with  his  hypocrisy?  Yet  on  other  hand  if  Christ 
did  not  know  him,  he  was  not  omniscient.  Ans:  Judas 
was  necessary  to  the  bringing-  about  of  the  crucifixion. 
Strauss  declares  he  was  not.  We  answer,  the  divine  plan 
was  that  Jesus  should  sufler  at  the  feast,  and  to  this  end 


148 

was  Judas  foreordained.  Christ's  death  was  to  be  ac- 
complished by  the  lowest  form  of  human  depravity — 
dying  for  the  sins  of  men,  he  must  die  thron<j:h  the 
most  heinous  phase  of  sin.  His  humiliation  is  the  deeper 
on  account  of  Judas's  treachery.  Neander's  idea  : 
Christ  thought  he  could  reform  Judas,  who  was  'Apolitical 
adrenturer.  This  view  is  held  by  some,  Judas  expected 
to  hold  a  high  position  in  Messiah's  kingdom,  but  Christ's 
public  entrance  and  the  discourses  following  assured  him 
his  hopes  could  not  be  realized,  and  filled  with  rage  and 
disappointment  he  betrays  Jesus.  Alford  and  others 
think  Judas  may  have  been  uncertain  as  to  the  result. 
His  betrayal  of  Jesus  was  intended  only  to  result  in  his 
trial.  Even  on  this  theory,  notice  Judas  took  care  to 
get  the  money.  Whately  and  Hanna  aver  that  Judas 
thought  Jesus  would  rescue  himself  by  some  great  mira- 
cle, expecting  thus  to  have  establishment  of  Christ's 
external  kingdom  hastened.  His  motive  thus  made  out 
to  be  a  good  one.  Ans  :  1.  It  is  inconceivable  that  Judas 
could  have  had  such  an  idea — he  must  then  have  been 
insane.  2.  In  the  Gospels  the  motive  made  prominent 
is  covetousness,  wliich  was  sufficient  to  produce  the  result. 
To  this  is  joined  resentment  for  rebuke  received  from 
Christ  at  the  Supper. 

8.  A  fair  inference  is  that  he  was  disappointed  in  his 
expectations  as  to  the  nature  of  the  kingdom.  This 
however  does  not  alleviate  the  bad  character  of  the  man. 
"  By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them."  Lange  says  that 
when  Judas  received  the  money  he  put  himself  outside 
the  pale  of  honorable  motives. 

§132.  Preparation  for  the  Passover.  Wieseler  and  Rob- 
inson say  Nisan  14th.  Bleek  and  Tischendorf  say  Thurs- 
day, Nisan  15th.  Wednesday  had  been  spent  as  a  day  of 
quiet  at  Bethany.  The  common  arrangement  adds  to 
this  rest  a  portion  of  Thursday.  The  Passover  Supper 
was  eaten  on  the  first  (r-y  Tipcorfj)  day  of  the  feast  of 
Unleavened  Bread — in  the  evening.  During  the  day 
close  search  was  made  for  leaven  whicli  was  the  symbol 
of  that  which  must  be  put  away.  That  this  Supper  was 
the  regular  Passover  Supper  is  proved,  1.  By  r-y  TzotozYj. 
This  expression  implies  that  it  must  l)e  so.  2.  From  the 
definite  expression  that  follows,  "  When   the    Passover 


149 

must  be  killed."  3.  Agrees  witli  fact  that  priests  had  to 
kill  the  lamb  in  the  Temple.  4.  The  remark  of  the  dis- 
ciples, "where  shall  we  i)repare,'''  &c.,  shows  that  the 
time  had  come.  Sends  two  disciples  who  find  the  place 
by  a  miraculous  method.  Objection  that  Mt.  makes  no 
mention  of  this.  But  there  is  no  contradiction,  and  the 
miraculous  is  implied.  Objection  :  Difficulty  of  obtaining 
a  place  after  preparations  had  been  so  long  delayed. 
Jerusalem  crowded,  even  surrounding  hills  being  occu- 
pied with  tents.  Answer  :  B^nongh  for  the  man  to  be 
told,  "the  master  needs  a  room."  Secrecy  the  reason  of 
delay  ;  state  of  feeling  in  the  city  concerning  Christ  and 
bargain  of  Judas  on  previous  evening  made  it  necessary. 
Finding  room  as  directed,  Peter  and  John  prepare  for 
the  Su[)per,  unleavened  bread,  bitter  herbs,  and  a  lamb. 
Lamb,  previously  purcliased  and  set  apart,  was  carried 
to  temple  between  three  and  six  o'clock  ;  slain  by  the 
priests  and  its  blood  sprinkled. 

Passover  Sapper.  Order  of  Events.  Difference  of  opin- 
ion— on  several  points  certainty  is  impossible.  But 
best  harmonists  are  substantially  agreed.  Mt.  and  Mk. 
agree  in  simple  narrative.  Lk.  gives  Christ's  words  at 
opening  of  the  meal.  John  gives  incident  of  washing 
disciples'  feet.  Commonly  agreed  that  contention  for 
precedency  and  the  washing  of  feet  are  to  be  placed 
together ;  because  {a)  Former  would  naturally  occur 
upon  taking  places  at  the  table;  [h)  Latter,  in  beginning 
or  during  the  meal.  Our  version  (John  13:2)  implies 
it  was  after  the  meal — yzvoidvou  should  be  ycuoitiivou.  sup- 
per "  being  come"  ;  ic)  connection  in  Lk.  (v.  24)  syevsro 
ds,  an  aorist,  better  rendered  "there  was,"  not  "  had 
been  "  ;  {d)  Design  of  Lk.  for  narrating  events  out  of 
natural  order,  was  to  contrast  solemnity  of  scene  and 
Christ's  authority  and  dignity  with  laxity  of  disciples. 
Lk.'s  order  is  :  Christ's  words — question  of  precedency 
— Peter's  denial,  and  desertion  of  all  ;  [e)  Find  natural 
order  in  John  ;  (/)  The  internal  agreement  of  Luke's 
account  with  John's  reads  like  one  narrative. 

W(t,s  Judas  present  at  the  Eucharist?  Lk.  puts  institu- 
tion before  pointing  out  of  traitor;  Mt.  and  Mk.  after. 
Most  reformed  writers  deny  presence  of  Judas,  because 
a.  Inherent  probability  that  he  was  sent   out  before  the 


150 

sacrament,  b.  John  says,  (13:  30,)  Jndas  went  out  im- 
mediately after  receiving  tlic  sop,  and  Eucliarist  not  be- 
fore that.  c.  Pointing  ont  was  while  eating,  but  sacra- 
ment was  after  supper.  Jndas  tooic  wine  as  well  as  bread 
before  he  left.  d.  Lk,  changes  order.  1.  To  cf>ntrast 
spirit  of  Su[)per  and  spirit  of  disciples.  2.  Mention  of 
cup  in  V.  17  naturally  leads  him  to  describe   the  Supper. 

Exact  time  of  (NstitiAtuHi  Sacrament.  See  Lightfoot  for 
descri[)tion  of  Rabbinical  customs.  Possible  that  Christ 
followed  all  the  customs  and  observances,  but  still  evi- 
dent that  Lord's  Supper  was  grafted  on  the  Paschal  Sup- 
per, Cannot  identify  exact  time.  Christ  may  liave 
chosen  to  contrast  the  Supper. 

§133.  Opening  words  ami  contention  of  the  Twelve.  Tliey 
were  seated — original  rule  to  stand,  reminding  of  liaste 
in  leaving  Egypt.  Christ  in  sanctioning  this  departure 
from  the  rule,  teaches  that  we  are  not  bound  in  nnessen- 
tials.  Prominence  of  Sufering.  "  With  desire  I  have  de- 
sired to  eat  this  Passover  with  you  before  I  suffer  " — 
liinting  that  his  suffering  was  near  at  liand.  Reason  for 
the  desire — "For  I  will  not  eat  again  until  it  be  fulfil  led 
in  the  kingdom  of  God  "—makes  last  supper  emphatic. 
He  takes  "cup  of  blessing  " — not  cup  of  sacrament, 
which  is  mentioned  in  20  v.  Inference  is  unfounded, 
that  Christ  did  not  partake.  Main  idea  of  passage  is  in 
7t}j]i)ajOr].  Central  point  of  economy  of  Redemption  is 
reached — type  i'ulfilled  in  presence  of  Antetype.  Notice 
allusion  to  the  formulas  of  feast  in  eoxaiuazr^aa::. 

Contention  for  pre-ejninence.  Objections  to  its  occurrence. 
1.  Strauss  and  DeWette.  Mentioned  only  in  Lk.  and 
the  promise  of  exaltation  is  out  of  place.  2.  Unnatural 
that  such  dispute  should  occur  among  disciples  at  such  a 
time.  Ans:  It  had  occurred  before",  and  clearly,  shows 
strong  impression  existing  among  them  even  now  of 
external  nature  of  Christ's  kingdom.  Jesus  rebukes 
their  worldly  spirit — teaching  that  onl}^  liumility  can 
exalt;  commends  fidelity  and  promises  exaltation  to 
thrones  of  judgment  of  twelve  tribes. 

§134.  Was/ling  Disciples  feet.  It  may  have  been  done 
on  entering,  John  13:1-20;  hinted  at  in  Lk.  22:27. 
John  puts  it  after  receiving  of  wine.  Three  lessons :  a. 
Proof   of   continued    love    of   Christ.      b.    Example    of 


151 

hnnnlity.  c.  Implied  snr.etification — washing  of  grace, 
a  part  of  Christ's  service.  Jolin  only  refers  to  Judas's 
treachery  13  :  11.     Ps.  41 :  9  fultillod. 

§135.  Fomt'mg  out  the  Traitor.  Separation  of  Judas 
preceded  the  sacrament.  Clirist's  distress  very  great  at 
horror  of  tlie  crime  and  sorrow  for  Judas.  Announce- 
ment withhehl  till  now  tliat  Judas  ma}'  be  kept  near. 
Made  now:  1.  To  show  Christ's  foreknowledge,  and 
make  disciples  believe  after  it  occurred.  2.  To  be  rid  of 
Judas'  presence.  3.  To  carr}-  out  Christ's  design  of  being 
crucified  at  the  Feast.  4.  As  a  warning  to  disciples  and 
all  his  followers. 

Effect  on  Disciples  :  At  intimation  of  Christ  that  one 
of  them  siiould  betray  him — natural  they  should  not 
suspect  Judas.  Ask  each  other  "  Is  it  I?"  Translation 
does  not  give  force  of  Gk.;  better  read,  "  Lord  it  is  not 

1,  is  it  ?"  More  simple  and  negative.  Synoptists  make 
each  disciple  ask  it  of  Christ.  John  omits  this  ;  says 
Peter  beckoned  to  John  to  ask.  Mt.  and  Mark  give 
Christ's  reply,  "  He  that  dippeth,"  etc.;  John,  "  To  whom 
T  give  the  sop." 

^Otijections :  1.  John's  account  does  not  imply  private 
communication  of  Peter,  and  act  of  dipping  together 
could  not  be  distinctive.  Ans  :  The  act  of  simultaneous 
dipping  could  be  so  marked  as  to  call  attention  to  Judas. 

2.  If  public  sign  given,  it  could  not  afterwards  be  said 
they  did  not  understand  his  treason.  Ans:  Objection 
based  on  wrong  concei>tion  of  amount  of  their  knowl- 
edge. They  did  not  know  that  betrayal  would  lead  to 
crucifixion.  Andrews,  &c.,  put  questions  of  Syn.  prior 
to  that  of  John,  and  point  to  iniquity  ot  deed.  Again 
Mt.   and  Mk's  description   more  general    than    John's. 

"  Son  of  Man  goeth but  woe,  &c.,"  often 

quoted  in  proof  of  eternal  punishment  on  ground  that 
hope  of  salvation  after  period  of  disappointment  would 
always  render  life  desirable  rather  than  never  to  have 
been  born. 

Judas's  perplexity  :  Feeling  that  the  words  were  di- 
rected to  him  and  seeing  attention  of  disciples  directed 
to  him,  he  asks  also,  "  Is  it  I  ?"--consummate  hypocrisy. 
Night  when  he  went  out,  implies  quickness  of  his  plan — 
time  was  God's,  deed  was  Judas's.     Also  significant  of 


152 

darkness  he  was  soon  to  enter.  Christ's  glorying  is 
come.  Departure  of  Judas  was  sign  of  liis  victory — and 
the  beginning  of  his  death  and  glory,  "J.  new  Com- 
mandment;" new  not  in  principle  or  in  nieasni-e,  but  in 
degree  and  mode.  Brother!}-  love  among  christians  made 
test  of  discipleship — love  flowing  from  faith  in  Christ, 

§136.  Prediction  of  Peter's  drnial  and  dispersion  of  the 
Twelve.  John  relates  denial  in  close  connection  with 
Christ's  prophecy  about  going  away.  Lk,  in  connection 
with  strife  for  precedence  ;  Mt,  and  Mk,  after  the  sacra- 
ment, as  if  spoken  on  way  to  Gethsemane.  Two  alterna- 
tires  :  Eobinson  combines  these — prediction  uttered  once 
and  before  sacranient.  Mt,  and  Mk.  therefore  relate 
them  retrospectively.  Meyer,  &c.,  say,  prediction  was 
uttered  tvv'ice  to  include  twelve  with  Peter;  at  the  Supper. 
John  and  Lk.;  and  on  way  to  Gethsemane,  (Mt.  and  Mk.) 

Design  of  ■predict in n  to  fortify  disciples  and  prepare  tliein 
for  trial  of  their  faith — their  conception  of  Christ's 
kingdom  was  so  mistaken,  they  needed  to  be  huml)led. 
This  design  shown  also  in  Christ's  appointment  to  go  be- 
fore into  Galilee  after  his  resurrection.  What  tiiey  did 
does  not  indicate  utter  apostasy — still  sheep,  though  scat- 
tered. He  will  deliver  them  by  interceding — "  I  have 
prayed  for  you  that  your  faith  fail  not,"  The  Cock's 
Crowing.  Mt,,  Lk.  and  Jolin — "cock  not  crow;"  Mk., 
"  not  crow  twice  till  thou  hast  denied  me  thrice." 

§137,  The  Eucharist.  The  last  passover  culminated  in 
the  institution  of  the  Sacrament.  It  liow  becomes  a 
commemorative  and  not  a  t^-pical  ordinance.  Changed 
by  Christ  in  person,  its  celebration  by  his  people  in 
future  will  signify  to  them;  a.  A  memorial  expressive 
of  his  dying  love.  b.  A  pledge  or  seal  of  his  covenant. 
c.  To  be  partaken  of  by  all  on  his  authority  and  thus 
unite  them  to  him.  Shows  man's  inability  to  live  a 
spiritual  life.  Needs  an  outward  sign  to  strengthen  weak 
faith.  This  rite  is  distinctive  mark  of  Christians  in  all 
ages;  sets  forth  Christ's  death,  and  spiritual  presence — 
"  the  life  of  the  crucified  Savior."  Precise  time  not  cer- 
tain. Paragraph  in  John  so  close  that  it  is  impossible 
to  break  it.  Lange  and  Tisch.  place  it  in  32  v.  A  more 
prevalent  view  is  that  sacrament  came  between  13  and  14 
chaps,  of  John — confirmed  by  hymn  being  sung  after- 


153 

wards.  Some  associate  tlie  bread  with  tlie  supper,  and 
Clip  after— but  more  probable  tbat  tbe  elements  were  not 
separated.  Variations  in  words  of  record  :  Lk.  and 
Paul  (1  Cor.  11:  24)  are  alike;  Mt.  and  Alk.  are  alike; 
but  add,  after  distribution- of  bread  the  blessing  of  the' 
cup.  Explanation:  Some  think  prayer  was  repeated— 
3'et  this  was  not  essential  to  celebration  or  Paul  would 
not  have  omitted  it.  But  the  blessing  or  thanksqimng 
should  be  made  for  both  elements.  Sceptics  magnify 
these  discrepancies.  But  these  words  are  repeated%on- 
versationallyand  taken  from  Aramaic  where  "^.s"  is  not 
expressed:  "this  my  body."  Note  also  that  1.  These 
variations  give  fuller  idea  to  the  meaning.  2.  They  allow 
freedom  in  celebration  of  tlie  sacrament.  3.  How  are 
we  to  distinguish  between  binding  acts  in  the  ordinance 
and  those  not  binding?  Ans:  a.  Nothing  actually  binding 
which  does  not  appear  in  each  acco"unt.  6.  Nothing 
binding  which  is  not  intended  to  be  such  by  Christ.  4. 
Is  there  distinction  between  breaking  bread  and  pouring 
out  of  wine  ?  The  two  acts  are  really  one.  Paul  make^ 
no  distinction— neither  without  the  other.  Bread  sig- 
nifies nourishment  of  life.  Wine  shows  more  clearFy 
atonemml;  by  blood  of  new  covenant  we  are  united  to 
Christ.  5.  Did  Jesus  commune  ?  Lk.  22  :  17.  "Took 
cup  and  gave  thanks,"  &c.  Meyer  and  others  think  our 
Lord  only  gave  to  disciples  and  did  not  partake  himself. 
Alford,  that  he  took  of  Supper,  but  not  of  Sacrament. 
Most  think  there  is  no  distinction.  He  partakes  with  his 
peo[)le — as  their  head.  "  I  will  no  more  drink  of  it," 
&c.,  implies  that  lie  drank. 

_  Sceptical  Objections  :  S'trauss  admits  a  degree  of  proba- 
bility in  the  occurrence  of  tbe  Supper.  Jesus  may  have 
instituted  it  as  a  rallying  point  for  his  disciples.  Others 
deny  any  evidence  that  it  was  to  be  repeated  as  a  bind- 
ing ordinance.  It  was  only  for  disciples— had  no  refer- 
ence to  the  future.  The  celebration  is  due  to  and  rests 
iipou  Paul's  words  (I  Cor.  11  ch.,)  written  long  after 
Its  adoption  by  the  church  and  therefore  must  have 
grown  up  at  a  later  period.  Ans:  1.  Perpetual  obser- 
vance is  alluded  to  by  the  Syn'.  Mention  of  the  Pass- 
over itself  is  enough.  "  My  blood  of  the  new  covenant 
shed  for  many,"  has  no  meaning  if  Qonfined  to  disciples. 


154 

"  I  will  not  drink  it  until  I  drink  it  new  in  the  kingdom," 
&c.,  referred  by  best  exegesis  to  union  and  communion 
of  Christ  with  his  disciples.  2.  Institution  does  not  rest 
on  divine  communication  to  church  alone,  but  on  author- 
ity of  the  Twelve  as  inspired  witnesses.  It  is  thus  one 
of  the  most  important  and  authoritative  monumental 
records.  It  was  universal  in  the  church  from  earliest 
times,  must  therefore  have  been  established  by  the 
apostles.  Second  Objection:  John's  Gospel  leaves  out 
the  Supper,  but  gives  washing  of  disciples'  feet.  Ans  : 
John  is  supplenlentar3^ 

Strauss  asks  why  then  did  he  not  leave  out  the  feeding 
of  the  5000,  which  is  in  all  other  Gospels  ?  John  would 
naturally  be  disposed  to  mention  supper,  especially  on 
opportunity  to  correct  a  false  representation.  Ans : 
Supper  already  in  church  when  John  wrote  and  there- 
fore needed  no  mention.  Strauss  says  too  important  to 
be  left  out.  Ans  :  It  was  not  adapted  to  John's  purpose. 
Strauss  denies  this. 

Others  say  John  was  ignorant  of  the  institution.  Tins 
supposition  would  accord  with  John's  context  but  not 
with  his  practice.  His  purpose  to  record  Christ's  long 
discourses  requires  mention  of  feeding  5000.  Omission 
of  Lord's  Supper  only  shows  characteristic  difference 
between  John  and  other  evangelists. 

§§138 — 141.  Final  Discourse  and  Prayer.  John's  ac- 
count, 14-17  chs.,  to  be  inserted  in  Mt.  26  between  29 
and  30  vs.;  in  Mk.  14  between  25  and  26  vs.  Different 
opinions:  a.  He  went  into  a  safe  room  unknown  to 
Judas,  b.  Lange,  &c.,  infer  that  John  14  was  spoken  at 
table,  and  remainder  of  discourse  on  way  to  Gethsemane. 
c.  Difficulty  then  of  separating  discourse.  When  was 
hymn  sung?  Whether  last  thing  before  they  went  out, 
or  after  John    14:    31,  or  after   the  whole  is  uncertain. 

Historical  position  and  design  of  Discourse  :  A  summing 
up  of  Christ's  teaching  as  a  system — complete — con- 
nected with  his  going  away.  It  is  our  Lord's  fullest  ex- 
position of  the  consequences  of  his  resurrection  and  gift 
of  Holy  Spirit — properly  a  transitional  discourse,  l^er- 
sonal  position  of  disciples  a  type  of  the  church — they 
were  in  sorrow  and  fear.  He  teaches  necessity  of  his 
going  away  and  promises  to  send  Holy  Spirit  to  build  up 


155 

the  spiritual  kingdom  he  had  established.  Compare 
previous  discourse  in  Mt.  24  and  25  on  great  prophetic 
day.  Interval  of  vicissitudes  and  judgments  between 
his  death  and  second  Advent,  but  inward  life  and  knowl- 
edge of  church  were  also  to  be  extended.  It  combines 
the  general  elements  with  personal  elements  of  tender- 
ness and  love.  Everv  distress  of  the  believer  finds  relief 
in  these  chapters — germ  of  the  Gospel.  Meyer  says  no 
need  to  descend  to  proof  of  divine  origin. 

Common  misconception  in  regard  to  the  disciples  think- 
ing too  much  of  what  they  ought  to  have  been.  Narra- 
tive guards  against  this;  Christ  said  so  much  in  order 
that  the  spirit  might  bring  to  their  remetiibrance  what 
had  been  said.  They  were  in  trouble  and  in  sympathy 
with  their  Lord,  but  did  not  understand  their  condition. 
The  whole  prophecy  was  addressed  to  their  misconception. 

Analysis  :  Cli.  14,  Christ  goes  to  the  Father,  and  promi- 
ses the  Spirit — vs.  1-14;  going  to  the  Father,  he  would 
answer  prayer — vs.  15-17;  give  Holy  Spirit — vs.  18-24; 
does  not  imply  separation  from  his  disciples. 

Conditions,  vs.  25-26  :  Inspiration  ;  vs.  21-30.  Bene- 
diction. Ch.  15,  Christ  the  Vine:  Fundamental  work  of 
the  spirit,  union  with  Christ.  Those  holding  that  he  set 
out  for  Gethsemane  after  record  in  14th  ch.,  say  fio;Lire 
was  suggested  to  him  by  a  vine  on  the  roadside  and  by 
burning  of  pruned  branches;  others,  that  he  took  figure 
from  gold  vine  around  the  pillars  of  the  Temple  ;  others, 
with  more  probability,  that  association  of  the  cup  was 
sufficient.  Vs.  1-11 :  Union,  condition  of  fruitfulness 
and  of  God's  love;  vs.  12-19;  Union  with  each 
other;  vs.  20-25:  Relation  to  the  world;  vs.  26, 
27:  Personal  and  official  gift  of  Holy  Spirit.  Chp. 
16,  Work  of  Holij  Spirit;  vs.  1-4,  belong  to  last 
ch.;  persecution  predicted;  vs.  5-15:  Work  of  Holy 
Spirit  in  tlie  woi-Id  to  convince  and  guide  the  church  to 
truth;  vs.  15-22:  Departure  immediate;  vs.  23,  24 : 
Hearer  of  prayer  ;  vs.  25-33,  Father's  love  and  warning. 

Ch.  17,  Sacerdotal  Prayer  :  Vs.  1-5,  for  himself,  that 
he  maybe  glorified;  vs.  6-11,  for  disciples  that  they 
might  be  one  ;  vs.  12-19,  that  they  may  be  sanctified  ; 
vs."20-23  prays  for  all  believers;  vs.  24-26,  that  they 
might  be  brought  to  his  glory. 


156 

§142.  Gethse.mane.  The  Syn.  record  the  agony  in  the 
Garden.  After  singing  the  Hallel.,  Christ  descends  to 
the  streets  to  go  to  Olivet.  A  cold  night — Peter  warmed 
himself;  and  it  was  moonlight,  for  tlie  Passover  was  at 
full-moon.  Preparation  completed,  he  went  according  to 
liis  custom  to  Olivet  to  spend  the  interval  in  prayer. 
Passing  out  of  the  eastern  gate,  he  descends  to  the 
brook  Kedron  (fr.  xsdpo^,  cedar,  or  to  be  dark)  now  red 
with  blood  of  saci'lfice ;  a  stream  dry  in  Summer,  but 
swollen  in  Winter  from  rain  ;  its  bed  60  to  80  feet  below 
the  present  surface.  Crossing  this  the}'  reach  -^(opsou,  a 
cultivated  spot — Gethsemane — surrounded  by  a  stone 
wall  150  or  160  feet  high,  situated  half  a  mile  from  tlie 
city  wall.  Ohjection:  Too  near  the  city  for  retirement. 
Ans  :  It  may  have  been  concealed  by  trees.  Traditional 
site  contains  eight  olive  trees  said  to  have  been  growing 
in  time  of  Christ,  and  the  tax-levy  on  which  can  be 
traced  up  to  occupation  of  Jerusalem  by  Arabs  in  seventh 
century. 

Leaving  the  rest  to  pray,  he  takes  Peter,  James  and 
John  to  witness  his  sorrow  ;  prays  alone,  returns,  finds 
them  asleep  ;  remonstrates  "  Could  ye  not  watch  with 
me  one  hour?"  "The  spirit  is  willing  but  the  flesh  is 
weak."  Some  sa}'  this  is  an  apology  for  their  weakness  ; 
others  that  spiritual  or  regenerated  nature  was  willing 
but  corrupt  nature  weak  ;  others,  sleep  due  to  force  or 
depth  of  personal  feeling.  But  Jesus  evidently  treats  it 
as  a  weakness.  The  'prayer  :  Mt.  and  Mk.  say  it  was 
thrice  repeated  "  falling  on  his  face."  Lk.  says  "  kneel- 
ing down  "  and  intimates  no  repetition  — an  angel  ap- 
peared and  he  pra^^ed  more  intensely.  Lk.  adds  also, 
"  his  sweat  was  as  it  were  great  drops  of  blood."  Some 
say,  like  blood,  i.  e.  in  large  drops.  More  commonly 
understood  as  blood-colored — ^showing  sympathy  of  his 
physical  with  spiritual  nature  ;  agonj^  caused  palpitation 
of  heart,  weakening  the  frame  so  that  blood  oozed  from 
the  pores  and  colored  the  sweat.  Prayer  for  relief  not 
to  be  explained  away;  it  was  real  and  sincere.  "Thy 
will  be  done ;"  same  words  he  taught  liis  disciples. 
These  words  play  conspicuous  part  in  discussions  of  Per- 
son of  Christ — being  exhibition  of  weakness  of  his 
humanity.     No  authority  to  restrict  the  "  cup  "  to  suifer- 


157 

ings  in  Gethsemaiie — refers  also  to  his  death.  Mk.  says 
this  hour,  i.  e.  appointed  season  of  The  passion.  That 
suffering  was  natural  anguish  upon  approaching  death, 
is  lowest  view  and  unsatisfactory,  giving  ground  to  infi- 
dels who  say  others  not  having  as  lofty  notions  as  Christ 
died  more  nobly.  Strauss  makes  it  derogatory  to  char- 
acter of  Jesus  and  considers  accounts  given  only  as 
opinions.  Renan  suggests  a  moral  ground  for  liis  suf- 
fering— his  disappointed  expectations,  and  sorrow  for 
his  people.  None  of  these  theories  sufiicient  to  account 
for  fact.  Suffering  therefore  must  have  been  for  sin. 
His  anticipations,  though  great,  were  exceeded  by  reality. 
This  excess  of  anticipated  distress  not  superfluous.  Some 
suggest  its  important  relation  to  agoin^  on  the  cross; 
showing  suffering  as  moral  in  nature,  not  merely  ph3'si- 
cal.  But  suffering  in  garden  was  greater  tlian  at  cruci- 
fixion— throws  liglit  also  on  mind  of  Jesus  and  gives  im- 
portant examples.  Notice:  First  trial— in  blood-like 
sweat — was  private.  His  inevitable  anguish  hidden  from 
profane  eyes  of  men  ;  at  cross  he  was  as  a  lamb  led  to 
slaughter. 

Ohjenions :  1.  Discrepancies  between  Mk.  and  Lk. 
2.  Lack  of  sympathy  in  the  discourse.  John  passes  over 
agony  entirely.  4.  Main  objection:  Synoptists' account 
inconsistent  with  John  14-17  chaps,  especially  in  prayer; 
not  only  an  impossible  change  of  mood  but  a  falling  from 
state  of  strength  and  majesty  to  one  of  doubt  and  con- 
flict; hence  either  one  or  both  accounts  not  historical. 
5.  Unnatural  for  Christ  to  deliver  a  long  discourse  at 
such  a  time  and  impossible  for  John  to  remember  it. 
Strauss,  more  consistent  than  the  rest,  considers  it  a  »?j/i/i, 
and  makes  these  its  stages  :  a.  After  the  Passover,  rev- 
erence of  believers  led  them  to  think  Christ's  sutferings 
were  foreknown  to  him.  h.  He  not  only  foreknew,  but 
had  actually  experienced  them.  c,  Had  also  intended 
them  beforehand.  Ans :  No  real  difhcuity  ;  John  says 
he  speaks  ;  Syn.,  agonizes.  No  change  of  purpose  but  of 
feeling.  Perfection  of  human  nature  would  tend  to 
change  state  of  mind,  while  steadfast  purpose  under  all 
suffering  proves  his  divine  nature. 

Reasoning  of  Rationalists  Suicidal.  They  say  natural 
anguish  at  approaching  death  not  suflicient  to  account 


158 

for  his  intense  suffering.  They  therefore  admit  the  his- 
torical fact  of  the  suffering.  But  this  suffering  is  unac- 
countahle  except  on  ground  of  union  of  divine  and  human 
in  Clirist,  and  his  suffering  for  sin.  As  long  as  history 
stands,  sceptics  are  condemned. 

§143.  Betrayal  and  Airest.  Jesus,  returning  from  prayer 
the  third  time,  and  finding  the  disciples  asleep,  says, 
"  Sleep  on,"  and  yet  adds,  "Arise."  Sudden  transition 
explained  :  c?,  As  only  a  question  :  "Sleep  ye  on  still  ?" 
(Greswell  and  Kohinson);  h.  As  ironical  (Calvin,  Meyer); 
c.  Better  to  suppose  interval  of  time  elapsed  between  the 
sentences.  From  his  elevated  position  he  sees  the  ap- 
proaching procession  after  he  spoke  first.  He  then  adds, 
"  Rise,  let  us  be  going."  Mode,  of  Betra)/al :  As  Christ 
pointed  out  traitor  by  "  a  sop,"  Judas  points  Him  out 
by  "  a  kiss."  Judas  was  at  work  while  previous  dis- 
course was  going  on.  Priests  still  afraid  of  people,  who 
would  likely  be  about  the  streets  on  Passover  night. 
Judas  directs  the  priests.  Mk.  and  Mt.  say  a  crowd; 
Jno.  a  band  and  leader.  Was  it  a  Temple  watch  of 
Levitcs,  or  a  Roman  troop?  More  likely  the  latter,  as 
priests  would  get  these  on  the  plea  of  keeping  peace. 
John  says  they  came  with  torches;  yet  it  was  moonlight. 
No  inconsistency  because  tliey  expected  to  search  in 
secret  places.  John  says  Jesus  went  forth  and  said, 
"Whom  seek  ye  ?"  They  fell  io  Ihe  groniid.  Some  regard 
this  as  eft'ect  of  personal  power  of  Jesus  on  their  feelings. 
But  words  show  it  was  miraculous — his  answer  to  their 
display  of  force.  Some  charge  that  it  was  a  theatrical 
display  of  power  which  he  did  not  intend  to  use.  A?is  : 
A  miraculous  evidence  of  divinity  appropriate  to  the 
occasion,  and  served  also  to  shield  the  disciples.  Ques- 
tion of  harmomj  :  John  says  Jesus  immediately  surrender- 
ed ;  Syn.  say  Judas  gave  a  sign.  Some  think  lie  surren- 
dered, and  "then  Judas,  to  keep  his  word,  gave  the  kiss. 
Judas  may  have  advanced  too  tar  beyond  his  companions, 
who  could  not  notice  the  kiss,  and  therefore  waited  till 
Jesus  came  forward  and  addressed  them.  Robinson, 
Alford,  &c.,  put  incidents  in  John  18  :  4-9  before  Judas' 
kiss.  More  |»robable  that  kiss  was  first.  Peter's  Sivord : 
CJirist  rebukes  him  and  heals  the  servant.  John  gives 
names.     Syn.  make   Christ   refer  to  cup  of  Gethsemane 


159 

which  John  had  not  related.  Lk.  adds  another  class  of 
persons — priests,  elders  and  captains  of  Temple.  These 
may  have  heen  present  fi-oni  first  and  taken  no  part,  or 
liave  arrived  subsequently.  Flight  of  Disciples  needs 
explanation.  They  could  not  understand  all  the  predic- 
tions. Until  now  they  had  always  seen  Christ  victorious, 
and  seeing  him  make  no  i-osistance  are  thrown  upon  their 
faith,  which  fails  them.  To  understand  their  action, 
must  look  from  their  standpoint.  The  youur/  man  loith 
linen  garment — mentioned  only  hy  Mark.  Why  insert 
this  when  so  much  else  of  importance?  Ans  :  a,  Inci- 
dent is  a  stroke  of  reality.  When  the  mind  is  aroused 
the  smallest  thing  will  strike  it.  Minute  things  confirm 
the  account,  h,  A  familiar  incident  in  court  of  justice. 
Garment  a  common  night  dress,  conspicuous.  It  attracted 
the  men  and  they  seized  it,  when  he  fled  naked,  c,  The 
young  man  was  John  Mark  himself  (Lichtenstein). 
Omits  name  from  modesty.  This  removes  all  difficulty. 
Likel}',  for  his  mother  was  living  in  the  cit}-.  Lange 
thiiiks  he  owned  the  vineyard  and  had  been  asleep  in  the 
watch  tower. 

§144.  Jesus  led  to  Annas.  Difficulties  in  harmon}'  are 
here  presented.  Jesus  is  led  before  Annas  and  examined 
before  Caiaphas.  Jews  are  under  necessity  for  haste. 
The  arrest  is  contrary  to  law,  and  they  are  afraid  to  hold 
him  prisoner  on  account  of  the  people  and  his  own  mirac- 
ulous power.  While  one  part  engaged  with  Judas, 
another  notifies  the  Sanhedrim.  Their  plan — to  secure 
sentence  of  death  before  an  ecclesiastical  court,  then  as 
matter  of  form  receive  permission  to  execute  it  from  the 
civil  court.  If  Sanhedrim  sentenced  him  on  charge  of 
blaspliemy,  the  people  would  be  gained  to  their  side. 
Plan  almost  succeeded,  but  was  made  sul^servient  to 
foreordained  plan  of  God.  Difference  in  accounts  :  Each 
gospel  has  its  own  plan  ;  Mt.  contrasts  Christ  as  Messiah 
and  King  with  his  rejection  by  the  people;  Mk.  gives 
vivid  descriptions  of  particular  events,  e.  g.,  of  Peter's 
denials;  Lk.,  human  maltreatment  of  Jesus  contrasted 
with  his  dignity  and  love.  So  much  is  recorded  in  the 
different  accounts,  and  each  luiving  a  different  design 
necessitates  differences;  but  a  knowledge  of  all  removes 
all   difficulties.       Three  stages  in  the  ecclesiastical  trial :  1. 


160 

Preliminary  questioning  by  High  Priest.  2.  Trial  before 
Sanhedrim.  3.  The  sentence  and  resolution  to  take  Him 
to  PiUUe.  Mt.  and  Mk.  tlins  give  tlie  order:  Before 
Caiaphas,  Peter's  denials,  Sanhedrim  in  morning.  Lk. 
gives:  Peter's  <]enials,  the  mocking,  the  morning  trial, 
Jno.  gives:  Meeting  with  Annas  as  tlie  first  Higli  Priest, 
Peter's  first  denial,  examination,  Peter's  denials.  Mt. 
and  Mk.  alike,  except  Mk.  omits  name  of  High  Priest. 
Jesus  is  charged  and  condemned  by  His  own  confession. 
Lk.  differs,  giving  Peter's  denial,  tlien  the  morning  trial, 
account  of  which  is  almost  same  as  that  given  by  Mt. 
and  Mk,  of  council  and  trial  held  at  night.  1.  Question 
of  Harmony  is  between  Syns.  and  Jno.  Jno.  represents 
Jesus  before  Annas;  Syn.  before  Caiaphas.  Is  Jno.  18: 
13-24  a  preliminary  examination  before  Annas,  or  only 
before  him  to  be  sent  by  him  to  Ca)a[ihas  ?  Wieseler, 
Tisch.  EII.,  Lange,  &c.  consider  it  one  examination.  But 
this  difficulty  arises  :  Syn.  say  Peter's  tlonials  occurred  in 
house  of  Caiaphas,  and  examination  and  denials  were  at 
same  place  at  same  time.  Hence  Meyer  and  Blackie 
consider  this  an  irreconcilable  contradiction.  One  sup- 
position, however,  removes  all  difficulty:  Annas  and 
Caiaphas  occupied  same  house.  No  improbability  in 
this.  Annas  was  old  man  and  father-in-law  to  Caiaphas 
(Stier,  Ebrard,  Alford,  &c.)  Solution  .•  Jolm's  examination 
was  also  in  house  of  Caiaphas.  (7,  John's  form  of  expres- 
sion— gives  long  descri[>tion  of  Caiai)has,  only  naming 
Annas.  They  led  him  to  Annas  first,  as  fatlier-in-law  to 
Caiaphas.  Ao-ain,  Joliii  and  Peter  follow  Jesus  ;  John 
knowing  the  High  Priest  entered  his  palace,  and  through- 
out describes  tlie  questioning  as  before  High  Priest,  who 
was  Caiaphas.  Passage  therefore  is  easy  if  we  admit 
tliat  Annas  sent  Jesus  to  Caiaphas  at  once,  b,  The  de- 
nials of  i'eter  are  thus  explained  :  Syn,  and  John  repre- 
sent them  in  hall  of  Caiaphas,  e,  Objections  to  this  view 
an  argument  in  its  favor;  v.  21,  "Now  Annas  had  sent 
him  bound  to  Caiaplias,  tlie  High  Priest."  In  beginning 
tliey  took  him  to  Annas.  Natural  then  to  conclude  that 
Vv'hatever  occurred  before  v.  24  happened  before  Annas. 
On  the  other  view  tlieaorist  aneazechv  must  be  translated 
as  a  pluperfect,  "had  sent;"  but  no  need  for  forcing  tense 
thus.     Statement  (vs.  24-28)  must  be  tal<:en  parenthetic- 


161 

ally  in  eoriiiection  with  the  blow  of  the  hand.  He  was 
boniid  and  therefore  defenseless.  Most  harmonists  take 
this  view. 

PrcUminarij  Examination,  probably  dnring  interval  be- 
fore Sanhedrim  could  assemble.  Robinson's  plan  adopted, 
though  he  obscures  plan  by  gronjting  Peter's  denials  by 
themselves.  Why  should  Jesus  be  taken  before  Annas 
at  all  ?  Because  iie  was  father-in-law  to  Caiaphas  and  a 
man  of  influence  and  ability.  In  questioning,  Jesus 
might  show  ground  for  accusing  him.  The  examination 
was  informal.  John  shows  it  to  be  sucli,  evidently,  what- 
ever view  is  taken.  The  High  Priest's  questions  are 
concerning  his  doctrine  and  disciples;  oioayr^z,  includes 
substance  and  mode  of  teaching.  Christ's  answer,  as  in 
the  garden,  shields  the  disciples.  His  teaching  had 
always  been  open.  -'Ask  them  wliich  heard  me."  He 
disappointed  the  purpose  of  the  High  Priest  and  he  was 
struck  by  an  attendant,  and  only  returned  a  mild  rebuke. 
Violence  having  commenced,  steadily  inci-eased.  Ohjec- 
tion  to  John's  account:  He  cunits  examination  of  witnesses 
and  forms  of  trial  as  given  by  Syn.  as  well  as  Chi'ist's 
avowal  of  Messiahship.  Hence  gives  no  issue  to  the  trial. 
Ana:  a,  John  adheres  to  liis  supplementary  plan.  6, 
Conclusion  is  involved  in  19  ch.,  7  v.:  "We  have  a  law, 
and  by  our  law  lie  ought  to  die."  (\  Charge  of  blasphemy 
was  not  real  ground  on  which  Caiaphas  consented  to 
crucifixion — but  consent  of  Pilate. 

Peter^s  Denials:  In  John,  during  first  examination; 
Mt.  and  Mk.  postpone  them  till  the  formal  trial.  All 
agree  it  was  at  night,  before  cock  crew.  Lk.  therefore 
puts  denials  first,  because  failure  of  the  disciples'  faith  in 
him  was  no  small  element  of  his  suffering.  John  tells 
how  they  gained  admission  to  the  palace — one  of  them 
being  known  to  the  High  Priest.  They  were  soon  sep- 
arated. Peter  warms  by  the  fire  in  the  court.  First 
Denial:  No  special  difficulty.  Addressed  bj- damsel  or 
portress,  whose  attention  was  probably  attracted  at  his 
entrance.  No  one  joined  her  in  lier  accusation.  Second 
Denial:  Went  to  tlie  j)orch  afterwards  when  the  cock 
crew.  Mk.  same  girl  ;  Mt.  another;  Lk.  a  man.  John, 
"they."  l*robable  that  portress  addressed  him  again  in 
presence  of  another  maid  who  joined  in — others  repeat 


162 

it.  Third  Denial:  An  interval  perhaps  of  an  hour  had 
ehipsed..  Peter,  to  alhiy  suspicion,  joins  in  conversation 
and  betrays  ]iis  Galilean  lang'nai!:e.  Kinsman  ofMalchiH 
(John)  begins  to  acoise  him,  a]id  is  joined  by  bystander!^. 
Charge  now  made  by  so  nian}-,  and  on  good  grounds, 
threatens  immediate  danger,  and  Peter  therefore  denies 
with  oaths.  Cock  crew  about  3  a.  m.  Sceptics  say  eight 
or  nine  denials  ;  but  the  charges  may  have  been  man}-, 
with  only  three  denials.  "  Looked  upon  Peter."  Jesus 
was  in  the  large  hall,  Peter  in  the  court  in  sight.  Or  it 
may  liave  occurred  as  Jesus  was  passing  from  Annas  to 
Caiaphas.     See  Andrews,  p.  491,  seq. 

§145.  Jcsas  before  Sanhedrim.  Mt.  and  Mk.  put  meet- 
ing of  Sanhedrim  and  condemnation  before  Peter's  deni- 
als, as  if  at  night,  and  distinguish  a  reassembling  in  the 
morning.  Lk.  speaks  of  no  nigh.t  meeting  but  records 
all  as  happening  in  the  mornini>\  Is  examination  in  Lk. 
22:66-71  different  from  xVIt.  26:57,58,  or  is  Luke's 
simply  a  fuller  report  of  a  second  morning  examination 
recorded  in  Mt.  27  :  1  ?  Oris  the  last  the  same  meeting, 
and  therefore  Mt.  and  Mk.'s  accounts  are  to  be  transfer- 
red to  the  morning  ?  Sceptics  say  they  are  irreconcila- 
ble. Most  orthodox  interpreters  resort  to  the  harmony, 
1.  The  simplest  method  :s  to  consider  that  Mt.  and  Mk. 
describe  a  different  meeting  from  Lk.  (Lange  and  An- 
drews). The  order  then  is:  Christ  taken  from  Annas 
and  sent  immediately  to  Caiaphas,  who,  while  Sanhedrim 
is  convening,  questions  Christ  —  then  Peter's  denials 
begin.  Sanhedrim  opens — trial  goes  on — mockery  &<;. — 
in  the  morning  a  formal  session  of  Sanhedrim  whose  same 
questions  are  repeated  and  a  charge  of  blasphemy  brought. 
Christ  sent  to  Pilate.  This  order  has  its  plausibilities: 
a.  It  keei:)S  each  account  in  its  own  order,  Mt.  27  :  1,  Mk. 
15  :  1  agree  with  Lk.  22  :  66  as  to  time.  b.  The  order  of 
time  favors  it,  "  When  it  was  day."  Mk.  is  still  stronger 
—  s'jOsco-;  Mt.  and  Lk.  say  early  dawn.  Lk.'s  examination 
in  the  morning  is  parallel  witii  what  Mt.  and  Mk.  say  was 
early  in  the  morning;  natural  impression  from  Mt.  and 
Mk.  is  that  trial  was  at  night,  c.  Certain  dilierences  in 
the  accounts  imply  two  ditterent  meetings.  In  Lk.  no 
formalities,  no  witness  given.  "  Art  thou  the  Christ," 
as  if  question  was  repeated,  and  designed   to  leave  no 


163 

donbt  in  any  mind  that  Christ  real!}'  claimed  to  be  such. 
Tliis  was  the  more  necessary  it'  mornino^  meeting  was 
fuller  and  more  ibrmal.  '/.  Jewish  authorities  aflirn)  that 
it  was  illegal  to  try  any  case  at  night  or  pass  sentence  on 
same  day  as  trial,  c.  The.hutteting  and  mocking  which 
Lk.  records  before  nu)rning  session  is  likely  same  as  Mt. 
and  Mk.  record  at  night.  Robinson  thinks  they  were 
repeated — difficult  to  suppose  however.  /.  Andrews  &c., 
argue  that  morning  session  was  in  a  different  place  from 
ihe  informal  one  at  night.  Lk.  says  they  hrouglit  him 
to  their  own  Council  Chamber;  the  trial  therefore  in  the 
liouse  of  High  Priest  is  ditferent  from  that  in  the  Council 
Chamber.  The  Council  C/inniber  of  Sanhedrim — connected 
with  the  Temple  enclosure.  They  were  driven  out  of 
the  place  a  year  l)efore  the  crucifixion,  and  held  their  ses- 
sion in  shops.  Argument  for  plan  is  doubtful.  2.  Rob- 
inson, Ellicott,  Alfbrd,  Meyer.  Lichtenstein  maintain  that 
Mt.  and  Mk.  are  parallel  with  Lk. — only  one  trial,  and 
that  in  morning.  31(nn  Benson  for  this  view:  the 
question  in  Lk.  is  so  much  like  that  in  Mt.  and  Mk., 
it  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  it  was  repeated.  The 
order  then  is:  From  Annas  to  Caiaphas — preliminary 
questions  before  Caiaphas  when  mornir.g  conies,  Ohjec- 
tions  to  this  view  :  a.  Mt.  and  Mk.  speak  of  presence  of 
Saidiedrim  in  house  of  Caiaphas,  when  Jesus  first  arrives 
there.  Robinson  assumes  that  they  mention  this  by  an- 
ticipation, b.  Mt.  and  Mk,  transpose  the  denials  of 
Peter,  putting  them  nfler  the  trial,  whereas,  they  hapjiened 
during  the  night  and  during  the  trial,  c.  Mt,  27  :  1  and 
Mk.  io  :  1  seein  to  in)i)ly  a  night  and  morning  meeting. 
Some  say  not  mean  a  new  meeting  but  only  a  resumption 
of  the  narrative  interrupted  by  mention  of  denial.  Others 
suppose  Matt.  27  : 1  was  simply  a  ]>rivate  caucus  of  mem- 
bers. This  method  yields  a  [lerfectly  good  and  historic- 
ally true  narrative.  The  only  historical  difference 
between  the  two  views  is:  Adoption  of  a  trial  by  night 
would  prove  an  unseemly  haste  on  part  of, priests  to  carry 
out  their  design  so  early  in  morning. 

T/ic  Trial.  Was  the  court  legally  constituted  and  the 
trial  fair?  Salvador  (Institt.  de  Moise)  views  the  trial 
from  a  Jewish  standpoint.  Answered  by  Dupin.  Philip- 
son,  that  all  was  done  bj'  the  Romans.    Comp.  Friedlieb. 


164 

Jews  claim  Clirist  was  an  imposter,  and  that  the  tr'al 
should  bejnds^ed  from  their  point  of  view.  False  claim. 
Peter  at  Pentecost  puts  it  in  ]))-nper  lio^lit — done  by  'daw- 
less  hands,'"'  (Acts  2:  28),  "tlirougli  iu-norance"  (Acts  3  : 
17).  Even  o;rantino:  Jewish  claim,  the  trial  of  Christ 
was  neither  fair  nor  legal. 

1.  It  was  prejudged.  Since  previous  Passover,  Jews 
"sought  to  kill  him"'  (John  7  :  1).  After  raising  of  Laz- 
arus a  formal  council  and  plot  to  put  him  to  death  (John 
11  :  47-53).     Did  not  now  design  to  give  him  fair  trial. 

2.  The  charge  before  Pilate  not  the  I'eul  ground  of 
their  persecution.  His  gathering  men  for  a  spiritual 
kingdom  would  distract  attention  from  resisting  the 
Romans,  yet  they  represent  to  Pilate  that  lie  is  |)lotting 
against  Ci^sar  (Lk.  23  :  2).  Their  charge  of  blasphemy 
(John  19 :  7)  founded  on  an  adnnssion  forced  by  High 
Priest  during  the  trial.  Heal  ground  is  political  jealousy. 
They  fear  the  influence  of  his  doctrines. 

3.  It  was  conducted  in  haste  and  in  cruelty,  (thus 
against  their  own  law).  "They  spat  in  his  face ;  they 
smote  him  with  rods;  they  struck  him  with  closed  flsts 
and  with  their  open  palms."  (Farrar.)  At  same  time, 
it  was  a  representative,  national  act ;  jurisdiction  belong- 
ed to  Sanhedrim.  The  legal  form  of  obtaining  witnesses 
was  obeyed.  This  necessary  because  of  Romans  (John 
18:31)  and  because  people  were  in  his  favor.  The 
chief  priests  and  Sanliedrim  "  sought  false  witness." 
When  before  .High  Priest,  there  were  no  witnesses. 
Christ  then  appealed  to  publicity  of  liis  ministry  and 
demanded  witnesses  (John  18  :  19-23).  They  must, 
therefore,  obtain  true  testimony,  yet  apply  it  against 
Christ.  This  is  difficult.  At  last,  two  bear  witness  : 
"  This  feUow  said,  '  I  am  able  to  destroy  the  temple  of 
God  and  to  build  it  in  three  days.'  "  Falsity  lay  in  their 
ap[)lication — wresting  his  meaning.  Yet  not  even  so 
was  their  witness  f'(^-y  (Mk.  14  :  59).  Difficult  to  prove 
Christ  claimed  to  be  Messiah.  Some  say,  strange,  since 
Christ  had  publicly  claimed  Messiahship  and  divinity. 
Ans  :  His  mode  of  teaching  was  nevertheless  enigmati- 
cal. Most  take  c'(t/j  to  mean  witnesses  not  ar/ree  (so  K.  V.) 
Law  required  at  least  two  (Deut.  17  :  6).  Sanhedrim  in 
a    dilemma:    will   not  acquit,  cannot  condemn.      This 


165 

equivalent  to  a  confession  of  his  innocence.  Even  this 
semblance  of  a  trial  writes  their  own  accusation.  Notice 
the  facts  of  his  life,  miracles,  doing  good,  etc.,  Jiot  denied. 
In  charge  concerning  temple,  possibly  they  thought  a 
claim  to  divinity  or  threat  against  temjile  involved.  So 
high  priest:  "Answerest  thou  notliing?"  "  But  he  held 
his  peace.''  Farrar  contrasts  with  trial  of  Herod  before 
Sanhedrim  (Jos.  Antt.  Bk.  14:  9:  4). 

Why  Christ  makes  no  reply  ?  Before  High  Priest,  in 
private,  and  before  Pilate,  a  heathen,  Christ  answers. 
To  false  witness  now,  he  answers  not  a  word.  Strauss 
finds  ill  this  silence  a  riiijth  founded  on  Is.  53:  7,  "As  a 
sheep  before  her  shearers  is  dumb,  etc."  Reasons  for 
silence : 

1.  Their  testimony  proved  nothing,  and  was  confuted 
by  their  disagreement. 

2.  They  would  not  believe,  had  he  answered. 

3.  N"ot  his  design  to  be  acquitted.  A  voluntary  sacri- 
fice. 

4.  Silence  thwarts  them  and  brings  out  his  dignity  and 
resignation.  "They  felt  before  that  silence  as  if  they 
were  the  culprits — he  the  judge." 

Priests  now  change  i)lan  :  would  make  Christ  condemn 
himself — illegal.  Excited  High  Priest  stands :  "Answer- 
est thou  nothing  ?"  Adjures  him,  "Art  thou  the  Christ, 
the  Son  of  God'?  (Mt.  26*:  63)  the  Son  of  the  Blessed  ?" 
(Mk.  14:  61).  Does  "Son  of  God  "  here  impljMdea  of 
divinity — or  is  it  simply  a  Messianic  title? 

In  favor  of  latter  view  :  1.  "  Son  of  God  "  one  of  cur- 
rent titles  of  the  Messiah,  based  on  Ps.  2  :  7,  not  implying 
divinity.  Idea  of  divine  nature  of  Messiah  lost  among 
Jews. 

2.  In  his  answer  Christ  puts  another  Messianic  title 
over  against  this — "  Son  of  man,"  based  on  Dan.  7  :  13. 
Held  by  Meyer  and  Gess. 

In  favor  of  former:  1.  Christ  had  used  it  as  implying 
divinity,  and  they  so  understood  him.  (John  5  :  18  ;  10  : 
36.) 

2.  This  accounts  for  their  rage.  Mere  claim  of  Mes- 
siahship  does  not  account  for  it.-  Rage  because,  f/,  priv- 
ileges to  be  taken  away,  and  6,  Jesus  claimed  to  be  the 
"  Son  of  God."  Form  of  question  makes  the  distinction 
— adjures  him  "  by  the  living  God.*' 


166 

3.  This  accounts  for  cliarirc  of  blnsplieniy— not  so  other 
views.  Mt.  26  :  65.  27  :  40,  John  19  :  7  sliow  their  ground 
of  accusation  was  in  tiiis  title. 

Christ  answers,  in  this  decisive,  tragic  moment,  the 
only  time  when  silence  might  have  saved  liim:  "  I  am, 
anci  hereafter  ye  shall  see  the  Son  of  Man,  etc."  (Matt. 
26  :  64,  -b  d-o.z).  Comp.  Dan.  7  :  13.  Some  refer  words 
to  last  judgment.  Yet  a.-dt>zc  (from  now  on)  would 
appear  to  refer  to  spiritual  king(h)m.  Whatever  the 
exegesis,  Christ's  design  appears  two-fold:  1.  To  assert 
his  "divinity.  2.  To  warn  his  enemies.  "Jesus  sii:;ply 
intends  to  indicate  the  point  of  his  deepest  humiliation 
as  the  tiiDuin/  point  between  his  recU^eming  woi'k  and  that 
of  judgment,  and  to  dcchire  that  at  the  very  period  when 
they  thought  to  destroy  liim, his  true  glory  would  begin." 
(Ebrard.)  Note,  this  the  first  public  assumption  of  title, 
Messiah.  Had  before  revealed  it  to  woman  of  Samaria 
(John  t  :  26) ;  to  disciples  at  Cn^sarea  Philippi  (Matt.  16  : 
20);  cautions  dis(Mples  to  tell  no  man.  His  claim  to  be 
"  Son  of  God  "  always  aroused  violence,  e.  g.  at  the  feast 
of  the  Jews  (John  5:17,  18);  in  Galilee  (John  6  :  40,  41); 
at  Dedication  (John  10 :  30,  31);  Jews  not  sure  he  is  the 
Christ  (John  10  :  24).  Now  lirst  asserted  before  his 
enemies,  when  he  intends  to  abide  consequences.  Culmi- 
nates in  a  long  conflict  between  him  and  the  priests  who 
would  liave  accepted  him  had  lie  accommodated  liimself 
to  their  views  of  Messiah.  Effect:  1.  High  Priest  rent 
his  clothes,  forbidden  by  Lev.  10  :  6  and  21  :  10.  Farrar 
savs:  "  But  Jewisli  Halacfia  considered  it  lawful  in  case 
of  blasphemv  (1  Mace.  11  :  71  ;  Jos.  B.  J.  2 :  15  :  4)."  2. 
All  vote  him  "worthy  of  death."  From  Lk.  23  :  51  some 
except  Joseph  of  Arimathea  from  Council.  Say  he  was 
not  called.  Probably  both  he  and  iS'icodemus  present. 
Even  small  minorities  may  be  right.  3.  Buffet  and  mock 
him.  They  "struck  him  In  the  face,"  "spit  in  his  face," 
"smote  hirn  with  the  palms  ot  their  hands,  saying  Pro- 
phesy, etc."  Does  this  occur  twice,  or  is  Lk.  [larallel 
with  Mt.  andMk.  ?  Ebrard  says  twice.  Robinson,  Gres- 
well,  say  once.  Probably  parallel  :  1.  Improbable  Luke 
would  represent  violence  occurring  in  regular  court. 
2.  Position  in  narrative  explained  by  contrast  of  men 
mocking,  with  Peter  weeping  bitterly.    By  whom  ?    Mt. 


1G7 

says  indefinitely,  "tliey  ;"  Mk.  says  -'some;"  Lk.,  "  the 
men  tliat  held  Jesus."  Inference  that  Sanhedrim  did  it 
first,  and  Jionian  oflicers  or  soldiers  followed  their  ex- 
ample, Jews  reject  this  interpretation.  Where  occur? 
Some  say,  in  prison  ;  Lange,  in  guard-room  of  priest's 
house.  Tliese  are  onl}'  guesses.  Strauss  sa\-s  mockery 
a  mvth  founded  on  Is.  53,  "  bruised  for  our  iniquities, 
etc." 

§146.  Mornwfi  Mcetiwi  of  Sanhedrim.  (Lk.  22  :  66-71.) 
On  Friday  loth  ]S'isan,  Wieseler,  Lange,  Robinson  ;  14th 
Nisan,  Bleek.  Was  this  an  informal  consultation,  or  a 
continuation  of  night  session  ?  Or  was  all  by  daylight, 
or  a  new  meeting  very  early?  In  our  view  a  new 
meeting  for  threefold  purpcise:  1.  To  convince  by- 
standeis.  2.  The  Oral  Law  ordained  trial  by  daylight, 
Zohar,  56.  Farrar :  -'And  they  who  could  trample  on 
all  justice  and  all  mercy  were  yet  scrupulous  about  the 
infinitely  little." 

3.  To  consult  how  to  put  Iiim  to  death.  Farrar : 
"  His  3d  actual  but  His  first  formal  and  legal  trial,"  and 
in  a  note: — "  It  is  only  by  courtesy  that  this  body  can  be 
regarded  as  a  Sanhedrim  at  all.  Jost  observes  that  there 
is  in  the  Romish  period  no  traces  of  any  genuine  legal 
Sanhedrim,  apart  from  mere  special  inconiDetent  gather- 
ings. (See  Jos.  Ant.  XX.  9.  §1  ;  B.  J.  IV.' 5,  §4).'"  The 
question  "  Art  thou  the  Christ?"  and  his  answers  read 
as  though  referring  to  a  former  trial.  Then  they  "bound 
him  "  and  led  him  Pilate,  a  transfer  from  ecclesiastical 
to  civil  court.  Their  evidence  of  his  Messianic  claim 
established.  Strauss  retains  trial,  on  charge  of  over- 
throw of  existing  institutions,  and  condemnation  for 
claim  to  be  Messiah.  Some  Jews  maintain  that  as  tliey 
had  not  power  of  life  and  death,  responsibility  rests  on 
Romans. 

§151.  Jadas  lumrjs  himself  (Mt.  27:  3-10,  Acts  1  :  18, 
19).  Robinson  transposes  suicide  till  Christ  was  given 
up  to  be  crucified.  "Till  then  he  had  hoped,  perhaps, 
to  enjoy  the  reward  of  his  treachery,  without  involving 
himself  in  the  guilt  of  his  master's  blood.  Mt,  places  it 
here.  Better  to  follow  order  of  J]vang.  till  proof  to  con- 
trary. Introduced  as  showing  by  striking  example  the 
effect  of  ill-treating  Christ ;  also  brought  by  Mt.  in  con- 


168 

trast  with  repentance  of  Peter.  Another  testimony  to 
innocence  of  Christ  (Mt.  27:  4.)  Lange,  as  symbolical 
of  the  suicide  of  tlie  nation.  Theory  that  condemnation 
of  Christ  took  Jndas  by  surprise  inconsistent  with  spirit 
of  his  own  confession  (v.  4)  and  every  fact  of  case. 

Casts  money  in  the  Holy  Place,  where  lie  had  no  ripjht 
to  enter — intent  to  return  it  to  them.  Si.irniticant  that 
blood-money  returns  to  Temple,  Christ's  body.  UitJer- 
ences  :  1.  Mt.  says  "hanged  himself  "—Peter  (Acts  1  : 
16)  "falling  headlong,  he  burst  asunder" — not  incon- 
sistent if  he  hanged  himself  and  rope  or  branch  broke. 

2.  Mt.  says  ""priests  bought."  Peter:  "Now  (his 
man  purchased  a  Held."  Farrar  :  "There  is  in  a  great 
crime  an  awful  illuminating  power.  In  Judas  as  in  so 
many  thousands  before  and  since  this  opening  of  the  eyes 
which  followed  the  consummation  of  an  awful  sin  to 
which  many  other  sins  have  led,  drove  him  from  remorse 
to  despair,  from  despair  to  murder,  from  murder  to 
suicide."  Robinson  '•  in  Acts  1 :  18  ixzrjaaTo  is  to  be  ren- 
dered :  he  r/ave  occasion  to  purchase.  Analogous  to  Mt. 
27:  60;  Joiin  3  :  22  ;    4:2,  etc." 

§146.  (resumed.)  Jesus  before  Pilale.  Had  Sanhedrim 
the  power  of  life  and  death  ?     No. 

1.  Distinctly  stated  in  John  18:  31  and  confirmed  by 
Talmud  (Berachoth  f  58  ;  1— see  Buxtorf  Lex.  Tal.  p. 
514.) 

2.  Impossible  that  the  Romans  would  leave  them  such 
power. 

3.  Accounts  best  for  anxiety  to  procure  Pilate's  con- 
sent. 

Dolliuger  thinks  they  had  this  power  but  could  not 
put  to  death  at  feast  time.  Objection  :  Sanhedrim 
stoned  Stephen.  This,  however,  was  the  tumultuous  act 
of  a  mob.  Paul  after  being  tried  by  Sanhedrim  was  sent 
to  Rome.  Two  results  accomi>lished  by  Providence  : 
1.  Christ's  death  by  crucifixion  (John  18:  32.)  2.  Par- 
ticipation by  Gentiles. 

Pilate  wa's  fifth  Procurator  of  Judea  which  was  a  liard 
country  to  govern.  Not  under  Questor,  nor  was  it  a 
proconsular"  or  imperial  province.  Pilate  insulted  the 
Jews,  a.  by  removing  army  and  images  from  Ciesarea  to 
Jerusalem  (Jos.  Antt.  18  :  3,  §1.)    b.  By  expending  sacred 


169 

money — Corban — on  aqueducts  (Jos.  B.  J.  2  :  9,  §4).  c. 
By  setting  up  in  Jerusalem  shields  dedicated  to  Tibe- 
rius (Philo.  Legat.  ad  Caium  §38).  d.  By  mingling  the 
blood  of  Galileans  with  their  sacrifices  (Lk.  13  :  1)!^  Re- 
moved A.  D.  36  (Same  year  as  Caiaphas),  by  Vitellius, 
Legate  of  Syria,  on  accusation  of  Samaritans"^ for  having 
slain  many  while  assembled  on  Mt.  Gerizim  (Jos.  AntT. 
18  :  4,  §§1,  2).  Eusebius  says,  wearied  with  misfortunes, 
he  killed  himself  Traditions:  1.  Banished  to  Vienna 
Allobrogum,  where  there  is  a  pyramid  called  Pontius 
Pilate's  tomb.  2.  At  Mt.  Pilatus  by  the  lake  r)f  Lucerne, 
plunged  into  dismal  lake  at  the  summit.  (See  Smith's 
Diet.) 

Has  strong  conviction  of  innocence  of  Jesus  and  en- 
deavors to  free  him.  He  is  impressed  by. Christ's  claim 
to  be  the  Son  of  God,  and  by  his  wife's'  dream.  Pilate 
IS  perplexed  by  the  Priests \accusing,  while  the  people 
are  favoring  Christ.  His  great  fault  is  cowardice.  He 
acted  from  policy  and  not  from  principle  (Chrysos). 
Collateral  evidence  in  Tacitus  Ann.  15  :  44  ;  .  "  Per  pro- 
curatoreni  Ponliam  Pilatnm.  suppUcio  ajfecius  eraC  Also 
know  from  Justiti,  Tert.,  Euseb.,  that  Pilate  made  report 
to  Tiberius  (of  Christ's  trial  and  condemnation),  which 
is  lost.     "  Acta  Pilati  "  now  extant,  spurious. 

Accusation  of  Sanhedrim.  Still  early  when  they  lead 
Christ  to  the  Prsetoriura,  which  is  generally  understood 
to  be  the  white  marble  palace  of  Herod  ;  by  some  (Ewald, 
Meyer,  Lange),  the  tower  of  Antonia.  In  John  19:  13, 
'•the  Pavement,"  outside  of  the  Prretorium.  Bears  on 
direction  of  Via  Dolorosa.  Jews  did  not  enter  Pr^torium 
lest  they  should  be  polluted  for  Passover.  John  18  :  28, 
not  proof  it  was  Nisan  14th.  So  Pilate  goes  out  to  them. 
Synoptists  give  general  description.  John  gives  conver- 
sation between  Pilate  and  the  Priests,  also  between  Pilate 
and  Jesus.  Farrar  :  "  The  last  trial  is  full  of  passion  and 
movement:  it  involves  a  threefold  change  of  scene,  a 
threefold  accusation,  a  threefold  acquittal  by  the  Romans, 
a  threefold  rejection  by  the  Jews,  a  threefold  warning  to 
Pilate  and  a  threefold  eftbrt  on  his  part,  made  with  ever 
increasing  energy  and  ever  deepening  agitation,  to  baffle 
the  accusers  and  to  set  the  victim  free,''^ 

Pilate  and  the  Priests.  First  attempt  is  to  obtain  as  a 
favor    crucifixion    of    Christ.      Chlirge    of    blasphemy 


170 

aajainst  God  not  sufficient  before  heathen  Pihite,  and  the}- 
had  no  other.  "  What  accusation  bring  ye  ?'■  If  he  were 
not  a  malefactor  etc.,  implies  guilty  of  no  ordinary  crime. 
Pilate  is  sarcastic  ;  "  take  ye  him  and  judge  him."  If  you 
condemn,  you  must  bear  the  responsibility.  I  execute, 
when  I  judge.  Jews  say  "  not  lawful  for  us."  Th«n 
began  they  to  accuse  him  (Lk.  23  :  2  between  John  18  : 
82  and  v.  33)  of  perverting  the  nation,  forbidding  tribute, 
and  claiming  to  be  king.  Notice:  1.  Not  same  charge 
as  before  Sanhedrim.  2.  Charge  false  in  feet.  They 
knew  Christ  taught  submission  to  the  government.  3. 
Ignominious,  as  Priests  advocate  that  for  which  they  con- 
demned Christ. 

Pilate  and  Jesus  go  witiiin  the  Prsetorium.  Pilate  did 
not  trust  the  Jews ;  knew  they  would  not  condemn 
Christ  for  treason  against  the  Romans, — endeavors,  ac- 
cording to  Roman  law,  to  obtain  confession  of  accused. 
Syn.optists  give  affirmation.  John  fuller:  "  Art  thou  a 
king  then  ?"  Could  not  say  "  no."  Pilate  might  not 
understand  "yes,"  Reply:  •' Sayest  thou  this  of  thy- 
self?" Design  :  Hengst.,  Stier,  to  arouse  Pilate's  con- 
science. Meyer,  Christ  demands  who  is  his  accuser 
Olsh.,  Laiige,  to  bring  out  sense  in  which  Christ  put  the 
question.  Jesus  makes  clear  that  his  kingdom  is  not  of 
this  world.  Pilate,  "  thou  art  a  king  then  ?"  deprecating 
accent  on  ^/;en.  Ans :  "  Thou  sayest  it  .  .  .  every 
one  that  is  of  the  truth  heareth  ray  voice."  Pilate's 
famous  question,  "What  is  truth?"  Whether  in  ear- 
nest (Chry.sos.),  impatient  (Farrar),  contemptuous 
(Meyer),  skeptical,  or  indifferent,  Pilate  gives  additional 
testimony  to  the  innocence  of  Christ  :  "  I  find  in  him 
no  fault  at  all." 

Priests  enraged  make  new  charges.  He  stirreth  up 
the  people,  beginning  from  Galilee  (Lk.  23:  5).  Pilate 
hearing  the  word  Galilee,  eagerly  dismisses  him  to 
Herod.     Second  effi-)rt  to  release  Jesus. 

Objections:  1.  Synoptists  give  Pilate's  question  to 
Jesus,  as  ff  outside;  John  says  in  the  Prpetorium.  Ans: 
Synoptists  give  general  account,  do  not  say  it  was  outside. 
No  contradiction.  2.  How  did  John  know  private  inter- 
view ?  Ans:  He  was  present,  or  Pilate  reported,  or 
Jesus  stood  at  the  door  and  all  heard,  or  some  prosecutor 


171 

was  voluntarily  within.  Strauss,  all  an  invention  of 
John.  Baur  finds  a  tendency  of  Evangelist  to  throw  guilt 
on  Jews.  3.  The  narratives  separately  unintelligible.  Ace. 
to  John,  Pilate's  questions  to  Jesus  before  accusation. 
Ans:  John  assumes  possesi?ion  of  Sj'noptists — also,  Pilate 
knew  much  of  Jesus.  Whole  city  in  excitement.  In 
Synoptists,  Jews  accuse,  Jesus  admits  and  without  in- 
vestigation (mentioned  by  John),  Pilate  pronounces  him 
innocent.     John  supplements  not  contradicts. 

%\^1.  jfesns  before  Herod.  (Lk.  23  :  6-12).  Priests  dis- 
appointed. Pilate  sends  Christ  to  Herod  :  1.  To  get  rid 
of  a  troublesome  case.  2.  To  keep  from  offending  the 
priests.  Other  motives  subordinate.  Herod  Antipas, 
tetrarch  of  Galilee,  was  in  Jerusalem  to  keep  the  Pass- 
over. Receives  Jesus  with  curiosity.  A  frivolous,  un- 
scrupulous, dissolute  monarch,  sensuous  and  mercurial 
in  character,  susceptible  of  religious  impressions,  unwill- 
ing to  renounce  sins.  Shows  no  appreciation  of  the 
case  ;  hoped  to  see  a  miracle.  Had  Christ  worked  one 
miracle  here  or  before  Pilate  he  might  have  caused  his 
release.  Reserve  of  Christ  sublime.  Herod  is  disap- 
pointed atid  sends  Jesus  back  vrith  scorn.  Judas,  Priests, 
Pilate  and  Herod  all  testify  to  his  innocence.  He  is 
mocked  and  arrayed  in  cloak.  Color?  /a^«-/>dtv— bright. 
If  white,  means  innocence  or  a  candidate  for  office  :  if 
red,  royaltv.  Probably  red  military  robe.  Shows  mock- 
ery. Fulfillment  of  Ps.  2.  (See  Acts  4:  25-27).  Herod 
and  Pilate  made  friends.  Enmity  probably  because  of 
Galileans  slain  (Lk.  13:  1).  Where  Herod  lodged  doubt- 
ful ;  probablj'  in  old  Herod  Palace,  Pilate  in  the  new. 
Objections:  1.  Why  was  Jesus  sent  back  ?  Ans:  Olsh., 
because  birth  in  Bethlehem  was  ascertained.  More  likely, 
could  not  find  ground  to  condemn  him,  would  not  op- 
pose Priests  by  acquitting,  so  preferred  to  return  Pilate's 
compliment.  2.  Why  mentioned  by  Luke  only  ?  Strauss, 
because  it  never  happened.  Ans  :  ITot  essential  to  his- 
tory. No  eflt'ect  except  additional  humiliation  and  new 
testimony  to  innocence. 

§148.  Pdatc's  third  effort  to  release  Jesus.  (Mt.  27  :  15- 
26;  Mk.  15:  6-15;  Lk.  23:  13-25:  John  18 :  39,40). 
Synoptists  full.  John  two  verses.  Mt.  and  Mk.  contrast 
jfesus  and  Barabbas.     Pilate  proposes  to  chastise   and  re- 


172 

lease  him;  a  compromise  between  sense  of  justice  and 
fear  of  insurrection.  Not  succeeding,  proposes  to  release 
a  criminal,  according  to  custom  at  Passover.  Pet)ple, 
influenced  by  Priests  ^Mt.  27 :  20),  demand  Barabbas. 
Pilate  had  been  warned  by  misgivings  of  conscience. 
Now  a  second  solemn  warning  in  the  dream  of  his  wife. 
Again  urges  release  ;  failing,  he  yields  him  to  be  cruci- 
fied. Nodce,  Pilate  comes  out  and  takes  a  seat  on  the 
bench  (Mt.  27:  19)  in  a  place  called  "  Pavement,"  Gab- 
batlia  (John  19  :  13).  Probably,  portable,  mosaic  pave- 
ment (Caesar  carried  one)  in  definite  locality  Gabbatlia. 
Where  ?  Lightfoot,  outer  court  of  Temple,  i.  e.  of  Gen- 
tiles. Common  opinion — open  space  before  Prfetorium. 
Not  secret,  examined  in  their  presence;  acquits  him 
fully.  If  innocent  why  punish  ?  May  have  thought  him 
worthy  of  some  punishment,  and  wished  to  please  the 
Priests.  Now  proposes  to  treat  him  as  guilty -fatal  step. 
Expects  support  of  the  people  to  release  him  but  is  dis- 
appointed. No  custom  known  of  releasing  at  feast. 
Originated  probably  with  Pilate.  Ewald,  to  commem- 
orate deliverance  from  Egypt;  others,  an  allusion  to 
scape-goat.  Not  so  ;  scape-goat  referred  to  Christ.  Was 
Barabbas  mentioned  first  by  Pilate  (Mt.  27  :  17),  or  by 
people  (Lk.  23:  18)?  Ans':  By  Pilate,  as  Mt.  is  most 
specific.  People  choose.  Note  1.  Barabbas  guilty  of 
crime  charged  against  Christ.  2.  Hypocrisy  of  Priests 
confessed  in  choice  of  Barabbas,  a  murderer,  political 
and  social  disturber.  3.  Christ's  purity  in  strong  con- 
trast. 

Barabbas  probably  a  zealot,  making  insurrection 
against  the  government.  Name— Son  of  the  father, 
dish,  supposes  he  was  a  false  Messiah.  Syriac  version 
reads  Jesus — Barabbas,  which  reading  is  adopted  by 
Tisch.,  Meyer  and  Schafi'.  Accounted  for  by  supposition 
that  he  was  pseudo  Messiah  ;  rejected  by  Lachm.  Treg. 
Popular  mind  changed  ;  now  demands  Barabbas.  Mean- 
while comes  message  from  Pilate's  wife  (Claudia  canon- 
ized by  Greek  Church)'.  A  disturbing  morning  dream 
(ar\p.tpov).  Some  say  suggested  by  God's  spirit;  others, 
by  Devil  to  avert  crucifixion  because  of  consequences. 
Bible  does  not  attribute  foreknowledge  to  Satan. 
Proves  Pilate  not   unimpressible.     Pilate  remonstrates, 


173 

but  is  overborne  by  tlie  tumult.  The  voice  of  the  peo- 
ple and  the  chief  priests  prevailed.  Choice  of  people 
renders  rejection  of  Christ  national.  How  account  for 
change  of  popuh'r  mind  towards  Jesus?  a.  People  at 
entrance  to  Jerusalem  mostly  Ga'ileans,  now  Jerusalem- 
ites.  Inadequate  reason  as  from  narrative  we  infer 
that  people  as  a  whole  do  both.  h.  Hatred  of 
Romans,  and  unpopularity  of  Pilate.  People  side  with 
thier  own  priests,  c.  Christ  now  convicted  of  blasphemy. 
d.  Fundamental  reason,  disappointment  of  Messianic 
hopes.  At  Christ's  entrance,  looked  for  external  king- 
dom. Xow  humiliated,  condemned,  mocked.  Might 
defend  himself  by  miracles  but  refuses.  His  own  dis- 
ciples forsook  him  and  fled.  While  this  explains,  it  is 
no  excuse  for  their  conduct.  Nothing  can  wipe  away 
the  stigma,  the  great  sin  of  the  world  by  vox populi. 

Why  did  they  cry  "  crucify,"  when  this  was  not  a  Jew- 
ish mode?  J.  A.  A.:  Jesus  was  substituted  for  Barab- 
bas,  who  was  to  be  crucified.  It  was  simply  because  they 
expected  the  Romans  to  perform  it.  They  thus  de- 
nationalized themselves.  Handwashing  by  Pilate,  given 
only  in  Mt.  27  :  24.  Andrews  transposes  to  John  19  :  15 
(§150).  Tisch.  and  Rob.  follow  Mt's  order.  Objected  to 
as  Jewish  practice  (Dent.  21  :  G-9).  Ans  :  Also  heathen 
(vid,  Livy  37  :  3,  Ov.  Fast.  II.  45);  a  natural  symbolic 
act,  evidence  of  Pilate's  inner  convictions. 

Compare  words  of  Judas  and  Pilate.  Judas:  "  I  have 
betrayed  the  innocent  blood."  Priests.  "  See  thou  to 
that."  Pilate:  "  I  am  innocent  of  the  blood  of  this  just 
person  :  see  ye  to  it."  Then  the  terrible  imprecation 
by  all  the  people,  "  His  blood  be  on  us  and  on  our 
children."  Tliis  curse  fultilled  in  history  of  Jews  to  this 
da3'.  Strauss  says  imprecation  invented  later  to  account 
for  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  Ans  :  There  is  no  real 
argument  against  its  historical  character,  for  it  arises 
naturally  in  the  struggle  between  Pilate  and  Priests  ;  it 
is  not  needed  to  account  for  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem (this  long  ago  foretold)  ;  it  explains  Pilate's  readi- 
ness in  giving  up  Christ  and  releasing  Barabbas. 

Pilate  proves  false  to  traditionaiw  Roman  tolerance  in 
religion,  and  yields  Christ  on  the  ground  the  Jews  tirst 
urge,  as  a  favor.     The  Hierarchy,  Political  power  and 


174 

the  people  here  combine  to  condemn  the  Lord  of  Glorv. 
(Comp.  Ps.  2  :  1,  2).  Some  say  scape-goat  typified  Barab- 
bas.  But  Barabbas  bears  avvaj'  no  sin.  Both  goats  tvpify 
Christ.  Skeptics  throw  away  historical  accuracy  of  trial. 
§149.  Jesus  delivered  up,  scourged  and  mocked.  (Mt.  27  : 
26-30;  Mk.  15  :  15-19  ;  John  19:  1-3.)  Lk.  alone  men- 
tions abuse  from  Herod.  Mt.  and  Mk.  allude  to  scourging 
as  part  of  usual  process  before  crucifixion  ;  John  as  though 
Pilate  wished  to  excite  compassion  or  contempt  and  pro- 
cure his  release.  That  this  was  purpose  of  Pilate,  see  Lk, 
23:  16-23.  Many  hold  Christ  was  twice  scourged.  Im- 
probable that  Pilate  would  allow  to  be  repeated  this 
cruelty  so  dangerous  to  life.  Soldiers  were  employed, 
and  not  lictors,  as  Pilate  was  a  sub-governor,  and  not 
Proconsul.  The  word  used  {iffw.yOjMao.i)  implies  that  it 
was  done  not  with  rods  but  with  the  flagelluni.  Farrar: 
"  It  was  a  punishment  so  hideous  that,  under  its  lacerat- 
ing agony,  the  victim  generally  fainted,  often  went  away  to 
perish  under  the  mortification  and  nervous  exhaustion 
which  ensued."  Why  such  malignity  of  Roman  troops  ? 
Sharing  tlie  hatred  against  the  Jews,  infiamecl  by  popular 
clamor  and  by  contrast  of  claims  and  humble  appearance 
of  Christ,  they  are  rude  enough  to  enjoy  this  brutal  sport 
as  a  break  in  the  dull  monotony  of  their  life.  The  pub- 
licity is  noticed  ;  ontlpav,  technically,  cohort,  is  the  whole 
band  (armed  by  Pilate  for  fear  of  tumult).  Scourged  in 
the  Prsetorium.,  enclosed  court  of  the  Palace.  Then 
mock  him  as  king,  putting  on  him  a  scarlet  (Mt.),  or 
purple  (Mk.)  soldier's  cloak  ;  on  his  head  the  painful 
crown  of  thorns;  in  his  hand  a  reed.  Did  Christ  grasp 
the  reed  with  his  hand?  Slight  importance.  Probably 
hands  bound.  They  soon  "  took  the  reed  and  smote  him 
on  the  head,"  and  then  paid  mock  homage.  Why  all 
this  indignity  allowed?  1.  Exhibits  the  evil  of  sin  ; 
human  cruelty'  exhausting  itself  against  a  Savior.  N^ever- 
theless  "  b}^  his  stripes  we  are  healed."  2.  Shows  Gentiles 
voluntarily  participated  in  rejecting  Christ.  Brings  out 
character  of  Jesus — his  sublime  forbearance,  his  super- 
human dignity.  A  mere  man  could  not  have  borne  it. 
All  this  quietly  wiped  out  by  skeptics.  Strauss  concedes 
the  scourging  may  have  been  performed. 


175 

§150.  Pilate  still  sefks  to  release  Jesus.  Ecce  Hayno.  Jno. 
19 :  4-16.)  Given  by  John  alone.  Some  take  this 
section  with  §148.  Confnsinir,  and  forbidden  by  fact 
that  this  is  after  scourgins:.  Pilate  tries  to  excite  pity  or 
contempt  by  leading  Christ  ont  in  humiliated  appear- 
ance, and  says  "  Behold  the  Man  !"  An  arch  on  Via 
Dolorosa  marks  the  scene.  Doubtful.  Effect  is  only  to 
call  out  new  rage — "  Crucify  him,  crucify  him."  Meyer 
insists  that  the  populace  is  not  mentioned  in  whole  sec- 
tion. Some  say,  because  priests  were  afraid  of  vacillating 
populace.  Most,  priests  mentioned  as  being  leaders. 
Jews  fear  Pilate  will  insist  on  releasing  Christ,  when  he 
says  ironically,  "  take  ye  him  and  crucify  him,  etc."  So 
they  now  introduce  the  charge  of  blasphemy  :  "We  have 
a  law,  and  by  our  law  he  ought  to  die,  because  he  made 
himself  the  Son  of  God."  Effect  on  Pilate  extraordinary 
— hears  it  for  first  time.  Superstitious  and  afraid  before, 
he  now  associates  this  claim  of  divinity  with  his  notions 
of  demigods,  and  is  more  afraid.  Leads  Christ  back  to 
Pr^torium,  and  in  tones  of  deepest  agitation  asks: 
"Whence  art  thou?"  Contrast  spirit  of  question  with 
that  in  previous  chapter.  Jesus  now  silent.  Pilate 
threatens.  Jesus  answer^:  "Thou  couldest  have  no 
power,  etc.,  .  .  .  therefore  he  that  delivered,  etc."  John 
ly  :  11-12.  y^hy  therefore  ?  Not  because  lesser  guilt 
rests  on  weakness  and  timidity  of  Pilate  (Luther),  but 
because  Jews  illegal  and  willing  persecutors,  while  Pilate 
with  less  knowledge  is  the  unwilling  though  rightful 
judge.  Farrar  :  "  Thus  with  infinite  dignity,  and  yet 
with  infinite  tenderness,  did  Jesus  judge  his  judge." 
Pilate  felt  it,  and  on  t-liat  (E.  V.  "from  thenceforth,") 
determined  to  release  him.  If  ever  a  prisoner  had  a 
chance  to  be  released  by  his  judge,  Christ  had  now.  This 
is  the  crisis  of  the  trial,  flews  threaten,  "If  thou  let  this 
man  go,  thou  art  not  Caesar's  friend."  Pilate  knows  the 
jealous  severity  of  Tiberias  towards  subordinates,  and 
remembering  his  own  former  cruelties,  now  yields  to  the 
threat.  He  brought  Jesus  forth  and  sat  down  on  the 
judgment  seat,  and  said  in  scorn,  "  Behold  your  king!" 
They  cry,  "Crucify."  Pilate:-  "Shall  I  crucify  your 
king?"  They  answer:  "We  have  no  king  but  Ctesar." 
This  is  tlie  lowest  point  in  their  hypocrisy.     They  claim 


176 

loyalty  to  Cfesar  and  thus  renounce  all  expectation  of  the 
Messiah.  This  ends  the  trial.  N'otice  Pilate  has  made 
six  efforts  to  release  Christ.  1.  Told  priests  and  people. 
"  I  find  no  fault  in  this  man.'"  2.  Sends  him  to  Herod. 
3.  On  return  from  Herod,  "I  will  therefore  chastise  him 
and  release  him."  4.  Appealed  to  the  people  to  release 
Christ  rather  than  Barabbas.  5.  After  scoursjing,  said, 
"  Behold  the  man  !"  6.  After  claim  of  "  Sou  of  God  " 
made  known. 

§151.   See  §146. 

§152.  Jesus  led  away  to  be  eruciHed.  (Mt.  27:  31-34; 
Mk.  15  :  20-23  ;    Lk.  23  :  26-33 ;  John  19  :  16,  17.) 

I.  Time  of  Crucifixmi :  Important  discrepancy  between 
John  and  Sjmi.  Alexander:  Impossible  there  should  be 
a  mistake  in  so  public  a  transaction.  Mk.  15  :  25  says, 
"  it  was  the  third  hoar  (9  a.  m,),  and  they  crucified  him." 
This  agrees  with  M.M.L.  that  there  was  darkness  from 
sixth  to  ninth  hour,  and  with  time  required  for  trials. 
John  19  :  14,  "And  it  was  the  preparation  of  the  Passo- 
ver and  about  the  .s?27/i  hour  (noon);  and  he  saith  unto 
the  Jews,  Behold  j^our  king  !"  Various  attempts  to 
remove  the  difficulty  (see  Andrews).  1.  John's  reading 
an  error  of  transcription,  rpczr/  instead  of  exr/^  sup- 
ported by  D.  L.  X.,  Euseb.,  Theophyl.,  Robinson,  Far- 
rar.  Bnt  best  text  is  ixtr].  So  A.  B.  E.  X.  etc.  2. 
That  John  uses  Roman  reckoning  from  midnight.  There- 
fore 6  A.  M.  So  Tholnck,  Olsh.,  Ewald,  Wieseler.  But 
John  does  not  reckon  in  this  way  elsewhere,  and  6  A. 
M.  would  be  too  early.  Too  short  time  for  trial,  too  long 
between  condemnation  and  crucifixion,  3.  That  prepara- 
tion denotes  not  whole  day  but  part  immediately  preceding 
Sabbath  from  3—6  p.  m.  Thus  6th  hour  before  prepa- 
ration would  be  9  a.  m.  4.  That  ajf>a  is  division  of  day 
— 3  hours.  "  Thus  1st  hour  of  day  was  from  6 — 9;  the 
3d  from  9—12;  the  6th  from  12-^S,  the  9th  from  6—9 
(Andrews).  The  3d  hour  of  Mk.  was  from  9—12.  Dur- 
ing this  period  Jesus  was  crucified.  John  refers  to  end  of 
period  as  6th  hour.  So  Grotius,  Calvin,  Wetstein,  but 
unsupported  by  usage.  5.  Hofmann  and  Lichtenstein 
put  comma  after  Tvapaaxsui^,  and  read  6th  hour  of  the 
Passover  ;  counting  from  midnight,  which  brings  us  to 
6  A.  M.     But  feast  beo-an  at  6  a.  m.  not  at  midniirht. 


177 

6.  That  "about  the  sixth  hour'"  taken  in  loose  sense, 
would  be  after  9  and  before  12.  So  Andrews  and  EUi- 
cot.  Norton  translates,  "  towards  noon."  7.  Lange 
(best)  that  the  two  writers  date  according  to  different 
idea.  Mark  may  date  frombefore  scourging  because  of 
significant  antithesis  he  wishes  to  institute  between  3d 
and  6th  hour.  John  says  "  towards  noon,"  because  the 
second,  more  Sabbatic  half  of  r.apaay.vjt]  was  approach- 
ing. (See  Lange  on  John  19  :  14.)  Any  one  of  these 
solutions  is  more  probable  than  to  say  none  possible. 

II.  Place  of  Crucifixion:  Mt.,  Mk.  and  John  give  the 
name  Golgotha  (Aramaic),  translated  xnaviou  totzo^  ;  Cal- 
variae  locus  (Vulg.),  "  place  of  a  skull  "  (E.  V.).  Lk.  2^: 
36.  Lk.  gives  xnaucou,  only  place  translated  "  Calvary." 
Supposed  by  Jerome  to  be  so  called  from  uncovered  or 
unburied  skulls  ;  others,  that  it  was  a  place  of  execution. 
But  "  Skull  "  is  in  the  singular  not  plural,  and  Joseph, 
a  rich  man,  would  not  have  a  tomb  in  such  a  place. 
Common  explanation  is  that  the  name  arose  from  conical 
shape  of  the  hillock  or  rock.  Mount  Calvary  is  a  modern 
expression.  1.  Place  was  outside  city  walls.  (Heb.  13  : 
12,  Mt.  28  :  11,  (John  19  :  16,  17.)  2.  It  was  near  the  city. 
(John  19  :  20).  3.  It  was  near  the  sepulchre,  which  was  in 
a  garden  and  hewn  in  a  rock.  John  19  :  41.  Fisher 
Howe  adds  a.  it  was  near  one  of  the  leading  thorough- 
fares (Mt.  27  :  39) ;  b.  it  was  eminently  conspicuous  (Mk. 
15:  40;  Lk.  23:  49).  Andrews;  "If  the  trial  of  our 
Lord  was  at  the  palace  of  Herod  on  Mt.  Sion,  he  could 
not  have  passed  along  the  Via  Dolorosa."  Church  of 
Holy  Sepulchre  is  the  traditional  site,  supported  by  Wil- 
liams, Tisch.,  Lange,  etc.,  and  opposed  by  Robinson,  Wil- 
son and  others.  The  main  difficulty  lies  in  settling  the 
course  of  the  second  wall — a  question  of  time  and  money. 
Eusebius  says  Helena  (mother  of  Coustantine)  built  a 
church  over  the  site.  Fergusson,  on  architectural  and 
other  grounds,  says  that  Mosque  of  Omar  marks  the  true 
site  of  the  sepulchre.  (See  Smith's  Diet.  art.  Jerusa- 
lem.) Answered  conclusively  in  £d.  Revieiv  and  Bib. 
Sacra.  Yet  architectural  argument  against  traditional 
site,  is  strong. 

III.  Significance  of  Crucifixion :  Why  this  mode  of 
death  ?     Crucifixion  known  to  Grecians,  Romans,  Egypt- 


178 

tians,  Parthians,PhcEnician8,  Indians  ;  not  used  by  Jews. 
Significant  that  his  death  was  in  a  mode  familiar  to  whole 
heathen  world  for  lowest  criminals.  Josephus  says: 
"  Titns  could  not  find  wood  enough  to  make  crosses  or 
places  to  put  theni  when  he  took  Jerusalem."  Cicero 
(Verr.  5  :  64)  speaks  of  it  as  a  cruel  and  terrible  punish- 
ment, such  as  was  not  inflicted  on  Roman  citizens.  Be- 
fore Christ,  to  hear  the  cross  was  a  classic  phrase  express- 
ing dishonor.  This  mode  of  punishment  was  abolished 
by  Constantine,  through  reverence  for  the  cross.  Un- 
known to  Jews,  except  after  death  the  body  was  some- 
times hanged  (I)eut.  21  :  22,  23),  as  special  curse  (Num. 
25  :  4  ;  2  Sain.  21  :  6).  Controversial  Jews  do  not  use 
the  phrase  crncif}/ ;  these  say  they  hanged  him.  Yet 
crucifixion  was  predicted  :  Christ  to  be  pierced  (Ps.  22  : 
16;  Zech.  12  :  10).  Also  the  scourging,  the  drink,  and 
the  parting  of  the  garments  belong  to  this  mode.  The 
same  dishonor  associated  with  Jewish  hanging  (Deut.  21 : 
23)  inflicted  on  Christ  (Gal.  3  :  13). 

From  the  Crucifixion  we  learn  :  1.  Judicial  nature  of 
his  death.  He  paid  the  supreme  penalty  to  rescue  us 
from  the  curse  of  the  law.  2.  He  died  for  the  whole 
world.  Jewish  Messiah  died  by  Eornan  punishment, 
that  "  the  blessing  of  Abraham  might  come  on  the  Gen- 
tiles," (Gal.  3:  14").  So  he  declared;  "And  I,  if  I  be 
lifted  up,  etc.,"  (John  12  :  33).  3.  His  death  was  conspic- 
uous. Lifted  up  as  brazen  serpent,  an  object  for  faith  of 
all.  4.  It  was  ignominious  and  painful.  This  shows 
the  nature  of  siiu  See  Plato's  portrait  of  the  just  man 
(Republic,  II.  362),  "  He  shall  be  scourged  .  .  .  and  cru- 
cified." Clem.  Alex,  says  Plato  speaks  like  a  prophet  ; 
Lightfoot,  that  only  chronological  impossibility  saves  him 
from  imputation  of  plagiarism.  5.  It  was  a  lingering 
death.  We  have  three  years  with  the  living  Christ ; 
this  gives  three  hours  intercourse  with  the  dying  Christ, 
6.  R  was  fully  attested :  not  done  in  a  corner.  No 
rationalist  can  deny  the  fact. 

No  wonder  death  of  Christ  transformed  the  cross  to 
symbol  of  highest  glory.  Chrysostom  says  :  "  Symbol 
seen  everywhere,  for  we  are  not  ashamed  of  the  cross." 
In  decline  of  the  church  it  became  an  object  of  worship. 

IV.  The  Form  of  the  Cross,  etc.  There  were  three 
ancient  forms  in   use  :  a.  the  crux  decussata  in  shape  of 


179 

letter  X  (St.  Andrew's);  b.  the  crux  conimissa,  in  shape  of 
letter  T;  c.  the  crux  immissa,  with  upright  one-third  of 
its  length  above  the  transverse  f  (Roman).  Origen  says 
like  T.  So  Tertullian,  who  argued  from  the  mark  like 
a  cross  placed  on  forehead  (Ez.  9:  4).  Same  form  on 
coins  of  Constantine,  commonly  supposed  to  be  Roman 
crux  immissa.  So  gathered  from  comparisons  of  Justin, 
Jerome,  etc.,  to  man  praying  with  outstretched  arms,  to 
four  quarters  of  heavens.  So  in  catacombs  and  early 
paintings.     So  writing  nailed  above  his  head. 

The  cross  (not  a  tree)  was  probably  made  of  sycamore 
or  olive.  Artists  make  it  too  high  or  too  heavy.  The 
feet  would  come  quite  near  the  ground.  The  hyssop 
was  Old}'  an  herb,  and  the  sponge  on  a  hyssop  branch 
reached  his  mouth.  The  thrust  from  a  spear  was  there- 
fore nearly  horizontal.  Cross  was  light  enough  to  be  car- 
ried by  one  man. 

"And  when  they  had  mocked  him,  they  took 
oti"  the  purple  from  him  and  led  him  out  to  crucify 
him,"  (Mk.  15:  20).  Crown  of  thorns  not  mentioned ; 
probably  removed.  Roman  law  that  condemned  should 
be  immediately  executed ;  important  to  priests  as  well 
as  against  their  law  that  body  should  remain  out  all 
night  (Deut.  21  :  23).  They  proceed  immediately  to 
crucify.  A  quaternion  of  soldiers,  and  not  lictors,  as 
Pilate  was  only  sub-governor.  The  centurion  was  usually 
mounted.  K^ot  told  how  far  customs  were  observed. 
Roman  custom,  a  tablet  hung  around  neck  or  carried  be- 
fore criminal.  Jewish  custom,  a  herald  crying  his  name 
and  crime.  Roman  usage  made  condemned  bear  his 
cross.  John  19  :  17  says 'Jesus  bore  his  cross  ;  Syns.,  they 
compelled  Simon,  a  Cyrenian,  This  probably  when 
Jesus  became  faint.  Perhaps  both  together  (see  Lange 
on  Lk.  23  :  26).  Meyer  supposes  him  a  slave;  some  say 
he  was  seized  because  a  disciple  ;  probablj'  because  he  was 
near.  Cyrene  is  in  Libya.  There  a  colony  of  Jews  ; 
many  in  Jerusalem  (Acts  2  :  10).  Simon  Mger  and 
Lucius,  prophets  or  teachers,  were  from  Cyrene  (Acts 
13  :  1).  From  fact  that  he  was  "coming  from  the  coun- 
try," no  inference  that  this  was  a  working  and  not  a  great 
feast  day.  Multitudes  of  people  and  women  followed 
lamenting.        Not    the     usual    lanientation    for    dead, 


180 

which,  at  least  according  to  later  traditions,  was  forbid- 
den for  criminals.  Some  say,  they  were  his  Galilean 
friends.  This  does  not  agree  with  "  Daughters  of  Jeru- 
salem." Some  say,  from  mere  pity.  Yet  Christ  deems 
them  worthy  of  a  particular  address.  Christ's  reply,  like 
his  lamentation  over  Jerusalem,  alludes  to  prophecies 
fulfilled.  (Is.  54  :  1  ;  Hos.  10  :  8  ;  Ez.  20  :  47,  comp. 
21  :  3  seq. )  These  his  last  words  of  any  length.  Jo- 
sephus  gives  a  dire  comment  when  Ije  tells  of  women 
eating  their  children  during  the  siege.  No  instance  in 
gospels  of  women  doing  or  saying  anything  against 
Christ.  Arrived  at  Gofgotha,  they  proceed  to  crucify. 
Wine  mingled  with  myrrh  offered  to  deaden  pain.  Far- 
rar :  "  It  had  been  the  custom  of  wealthy  ladies  in  Jeru- 
salem to  provide  this  stupefying  potion  at  their  own 
expense,  and  they  did  so  quite  irrespectively  of  their 
sympathy  for  any  individual  criminal."  No  analogous 
custom  at  Rome.  Mt.  says  "vinegar  mingled  with  gall." 
Mk.,"wine  mingled  with  myrrh."  No  contradiction. 
Soldiers  carried  a  light  acid  wine  (Mt.  27  :  34).  This  was 
mingled  with  pi;^,  1.  e.,  anything  bitter.  Our  Lord  re- 
fuses ;  an  act  of  sublimest  heroism.  Not  his  purpose  to 
avoid  suffering. 

§153.  The  Crucifixion.  (Mt.  27:35-38;  Mk.  15  :  24- 
28  ;  Lk.  23  :  33,  34,  38  ;  John.  19  :  18-24).  Mt.  and  Mk. 
speak  of  dividing  garments  too  soon.  Was  he  condemned 
and  affixed  to  cross  before  or  after  its  elevation  ?  Com- 
monly after;  so  early  fathers.  About  centre  of  cross  a 
sedile  to  support  weight  of  body.  Binding  to  cross  essen- 
tial to  prevent  tearing.  Disputed  whether  the  feet  were 
nailed  separately  or  together.  Most  fathers  say  nailed 
separately.  Because  Christ  walked  afterwards.  Ration- 
alists say  feet  simply  bound,  hence  Christ  did  not  die, 
only  swooned.  Justin  and  Fathers  say  Ps.  22:  16  fulfil- 
led, and  cite  Lk.  24:  39:  "Behold  my  hands  and  my 
feet."  Two  malefactors,  robbers,  were  crucified  with 
Christ.  Was  this  caused  by  the  Jews  to  degrade  Christ, 
or  by  Pilate  to  insult  the  Jews?  Probably  the  latter. 
Is.  53  :  12  fulfilled.  Mk.  15  :  28  omitted  by  A,  B,  C,  D, 
X,  Tisch.,  Alf.,  etc. 

The  Seven  Utterances.  Luke  only  (23  :  34)  gives  first 
utterance,    "  Father   forgive  them."     No   limitation  in 


181 

truth  implied.  Universal,  hence  appropriate  in  Luke. 
Conjectured  that  these  words  were  uttered  during'  nail- 
ing. They  signify :  1.  Intercessioii  of  Christ  as  Priest, 
a  sacrificial  act.  2.  The  state  of  mind  of  Christ  in  midst 
of  sutiering.  3.  The  spirit,  of  his  teaching,  "  Love  your 
enemies."  Fruits  of  this  prayer  at  Pentecost.  Comp. 
Stephen's  last  words. 

Farting  of  garments.  Custom  to  divide  garments  among 
executioners.  Condemned  was  stripped  naked,  not  even 
cloth  about  the  loins.  Divided  upper  garment  into  four 
parts.  Cast  lots  for  his  coat.  Priest's  tunic  seamless. 
Must  not  infer  Christ's  coat  a  priest's.  Prophecy  fulfil- 
led (Is.  53  :  12).     Mt.  25  :  end  of  v.  35  an  interpolation. 

Title  over  Cross.  Mt.,  "  This  is  Jesus  the  king  of  the 
Jews."  Mk.,  "  The  king  of  the  Jews."  Lk.,  "  This  is 
the  king  of  the  Jews."  John,  "Jesus  of  I^azareth,  the 
king  of  the  Jews."  Xotice  difi:erences :  1.  John  full, 
others  compress.  2.  Three  languages  used.  This  might 
account  for  differences.  Farrar  :  "  Title  written  in  the 
official  Latin,  in  the  current  Greek,  in  the  vernacular 
Aramaic." 

Vfhy  did  Pilate  write  this  superscription?  Ans :  a. 
To  make  a  show  of  legality.  b.  To  ridicule  the  Jews. 
This  last  strongest,  and  proved  by  remonstrance  of  the 
priests,  "  Write  not.  The  king  of  the  Jews;  but  that  he 
said,  I  am  king  of  the  Jews."  What  Pilate  had  written 
in  scorn  was  in  reality  a  profound  truth.  Pilate  had 
vacillated  in  serious  matters,  now  obstinate  in  small. 
Lange  insists  (from  Mt.  27  :  38)  that  the  thieves  were 
brought  on  by  a  different  guard  of  troops,  after  the  title 
was  set  up.     Mt.'s  use  of  tots  not  strongly  temporal. 

§154.  jeios  mock  at  Jesus  on  the  cross.  -He  commends  his 
mother  to  John.  (Mt.  27  :  39-44  ;  Mk.  15  :  29-32  ;  Lk.  23  : 
35-37,  39-43 ;  John  19  :  25-27.)  Four  classes  participate 
in  mocking: 

I.  The  passers  by.  (Mt,  and  Mk.)  ISTot  only  the  cas- 
ual passers,  but  the  crowd  railed  at  him,  wagging  their 
heads.  Fulfillment  of  Ps.  22  :  7.  Words  of  mockery  : 
"Thou  that  destroyest  the  temple,  etc.,"  significant  as 
now  being  fulfilled. 

II.  Chief  Priests,  Scribes  and  Elders  (Sanhedrim)  mock 
his    official    character.      (MML.)      They 'sneer  (literally 


182 

turn  up  the  nose)  at  meaning  of  Jesus.  "  He  saved 
others,  himself  he  cannot  save."  They  mock  also  his 
trust  in  God.  Ps.  22  :  8.  They  unconsciously  express 
the  profound  truth  that  the  salvation  of  others  implies 
sacrifice  of  self 

III.  The  soldiers  mock,  saying,  "  If  thou  be  the  King 
of  the  Jews,  save  thyself."  It  was  near  noon,  their  dinner 
hour.  They  offer  him  vinegar  (Lk.)  i.  e.  their  light  acid 
wnne.  Some  identify  this  with  previous  offering  ;  others 
with  offering  just  before  his  death.  Ebrard  :  "A  distinc- 
tion is  very  properly  made  between  (1)  the  myrrh  offered 
in  order  to  stupefy;  (2)  the  tantalizing  offer  of  the  j)osca 
in  Lk.  24  :  36  ;  and  (3)  the  offer  of  the  j^osca  immediately 
before  the  death  of  Jesus." 

IV.  The  two  thieves  railed  on  him,  saying  "If  thou  be 
the  Christ,  save  thyself  and  us."  Notice,  each  class  of 
scoffers  brings  out  specific  difference  between  Christ  and 
themselves.  All  involve  the  false  idea  of  the  Messiah 
and  his  kingdom.  Strauss  objects  to  the  differences 
in  the  accounts,  and  that  priests  could  not  quote  Ps. 
22:8,9  without  acknowledging  themselves  enemies  of 
the  Messiah.  Ans :  Proves  too  much.  Strauss  admits 
many  facts  which  were  clearly  predicted;  this  Psalm  was 
Messianic,  and  so  naturally  used. 

Conversion  of  thief.  Word  implies  violence  rather 
than  theft.  Substitution  represented — "He  was  num- 
bered with  the  transgressors."  Cross  of  Christ  discrim- 
inates among  men — election  represented.  Christ  shown 
as  Prophet  in  words  to  penitent  thief;  as  Priest,  in  offer- 
ing up  himself;  as  King,  in  pardoning.  True  repentance 
at'eleventh  hour  represented.  Abuse  of  the  example 
removed  by  example  of  the  other  thief. 

Second  Utterance  :  "  To-day  thou  shalt  be  with  me  in 
Paradise."  Paradise  used  three  times  in  N.  T.  Decisive 
against  Purgatory,  not  necessarily  against  an  intermedi- 
ate state  of  the  dead.  Still  a  question  where  Christ  was 
during  three  days.  This  utterance  predicts  Christ's 
death  071  this  day.  Speedy  death  unusual.  Objections: 
1.  Mt.  and  Mk.  say  both  reviled  ;  Lk.  says  one,  Ans  : 
MM.  speak  generically,  or  (better)  both  mocked,  then 
one  repented. 


183 

Third  Utterance:  "Woman,  behold  thy  son  !'"  "Behold 
thy  mother !"  Women  at  the  cross,  his  mother  and  his 
mother's  sister,  Mary  the  wife  of  Cleophas,  and  Mary 
Magdalene.  This  utterance  shows  Christ's  human  love 
for  his  mother  and  confidence  in  his  friends.  Shows  his 
grasp  of  the  future  of  his  people,  and  that  he  makes  pro- 
vision for  them.  Objected  that  M.M.  speak  only  of 
vv'omen,  Lk.  of  his  acquaintance,  and  only  John  of  him- 
self and  Mary.  No  contradiction.  Ohjected  that  John 
says  they  stood  by  the  cross,  while  Synoptists  say  afar 
off.  The  Synoptists  refer  to  later  period.  This  utterance 
Andrews  supposes  before,  KrafFt  after,  the  darkness  and 
final  mocking — unimportant.  Gospels  show  that  Mary 
laid  up  these  things  and  pondered  them  in  her  heart.  It 
may  be  her  influence  is  seen  in  John's  gospel. 

§155.  Darkness.  Death  of  Jesus.  (Mt.  27  :  45-50 ;  Mk. 
15  :  33-37  ;  Lk.  23  :  44-46  ;  John  19  :  28-30.)  A  new 
element  in  supernatural  accompaniments,  darkness, 
earthquake,  rending  of  veil,  and  opining  of  graves. 
These  are  divine  attestations  to  Christ,  and  symbols  of 
the  effect  of  his  death.  Would  have  been  unnatural  and 
out  of  analogy  had  no  signs  been  given  now.  Darkness 
from  sixth  to  ninth  hour.  How  long  Jesus  had  hung 
upon  the  cross  depends  on  harmony  of  Mt.  15  :  25  with 
John  19  :  14.  It  was  high  noon,  when  light  and  heat 
greatest,  that  sun  was  darkened.  Meyer  says  that  Luke 
implies  sun  partially  obscured  till  noon,  then  darkened. 
Substantiated  by  Cod.  Sin,,  which  supplies  in  v.  44,  rod 
■^Xcou  ixXiTtoi^TOi;. 

Extent  of  Darkness :  Was  it  confined  to  Palestine,  or 
more  extended  ?  If  the- former,  explains  lack  of  mention 
by  contemporaries.  Cause  of  darkness.  Many  fathers 
say  eclipse.  Phlegon  of  Tralles  says  in  202  Olympiad 
occurred  greatest  eclipse  ever  known.  But  this  eclipse 
was  a  year  or  two  too  late,  and  could  not  occur  during 
full  moon.  Seyftarth  holds  to  eclipse,  and  supposes  the 
Passover  two  weeks  after  regular  time.  Some  connect 
darkness  with  earthquake.  Majority  say  it  was  entirely 
miraculous. 

Objections:  I.John  omits  all  supernatural  additions. 
2.  No  adequate  cause  for  them.  3.  Not  mentioned  in  his- 
tory.   4.   Not  appealed   to  by  Apostles.    5.  Motive  for 


184 

mythical  orio^in  obvious.  Ans :  1.  Fricdlieb  quotes  Ter- 
tulliau  and  Lucian  as  saying  that  the  fact  was  recorded 
in  heathen  accounts  now  lost.  2.  Apostles  refer  to  Resur- 
rection as  proof  of  supernatural,  and  greater  includes  the 
less.  If  no  other  proof,  authority  of  the  three  Evangelists 
sufficient.  The  darkness  symbolizes  sympathy  of  nature. 
The  earth  cursed  because  of  man's  sin  now  participates 
in  redemption.  Corresponds  also  with  darkness  in  soul 
of  Jesus.  At  his  birth  a  new  star  came  forth  ;  at  his 
death  the  sun  was  darkened. 

Fourth  Utterance:  "My  God,  my  God,  why  hast  thou 
forsaken  me  ?'^  Some  say  after  darkness,  because  drink 
offered;  others,  just  before.  This  the  only  one  of  the 
seven  utterances  preser.ved  byM.M.  Mt.  gives  Hebrew, 
Mk.  the  Aramaic.  Meaning  of  this  utterance  :  It  expres- 
ses a  reality.  God  had  really  forsaken  him.  His  human 
soul  is  left  destitute.  Expresses  the  extremity  of  what 
he  came  to  bear.  Lange,  sympathy  of  soul  with  body  ; 
Meyer,  physical  pain.  Naturalistic  interpreters  deny 
importance  of  the  words.  Others,  little  stress  on  mere 
words,  as  they  are  simply  the  opening  words  of  a  Psalm 
of  triumph  (Ps.  22).  Others,  an  ordinary  ejaculation  of 
distress.  Others,  failure  of  his  plan.  Others,  mythical. 
Bystanders  say,  "  Behold  he  calleth  Elias."  Olshausen, 
Lange,  that  terrified  and  confuseil,  they  think  judgment 
and  Elijah  truly  coming.  Most  say,  it  was  a  wilful  mis- 
understanding. 

Fifth  Utterance:  "I  thirst."  Was  this  to  fulfil  proph- 
ecy (Ps.  69:21),  or  a  real  want?  When  he  used  the 
language  "  I  thirst,"  he  meant  it.  Meyer  :  1.  John  never 
puts  telic  clause  first.  2.  Ps.  69  :  21  refers  to  previous 
offer  of  vinegar.  3.  Christ  would  not  now  say  "I  thirst," 
if  not  true.  (See  Meyer  on  John  19  :  28.)  This  the  only 
word  from  the  cross  expressing  physical  suffering.  Geth- 
semane  shows  spiritual  suffering  not  to  be  lost  sight  of; 
this  shows  the  same  in  regard  to  the  physical.  One  ran 
and  filled  a  sponge  with  vinegar  and  gave  him  to  drink. 
Having  satisfied  this  compassionate  impulse,  he  joins  the 
rest  in  mockery  :  "  Let  alone  ;  let  us  see  whether  Elias 
will  come  to  take  him  down,"  Last  words  somewhat 
differently  reported.  Mt,  and  Mk.  say  he  cried  with  a 
loud  voice,  and  gave  up  the  ghost.  But  word  for  voice 
{(fcoyj)  means  articulate  utterance. 


185 

Sixth  Utterance:  "It  is  finished,"  given  by  John.  To 
be  taken  before  utterance  given  by  Luke,  because  more 
appropriate  and  intelligible  here.  Evident  reference  to 
V.  28.  Perfect  tense  ;  it  has  been  and  continues  finished. 
All  O.  T.  prophecies  and  types  fulfilled.  He  does  not 
mean  simply  the  scripture  has  been  fulfilled.  The  words 
go  back  to  the  counsels  of  eternity.  Redemption,  and 
Revelation  of  God  to  man  are  finished.  Conip.  John  17  : 
4.  Hengst.  finds  reference  to  Rs.  22  :  81.  Finished  is  his 
farewell  greeting  to  earth  ;  the  next  utterance  marks  his 
entraiice  to  heaven. 

Seventh  Utterance:  "Father, into  thy  hands  I  commend 
my  spirit."  (Lk.  23  :  46.)  Tisch.  reads  Trarjazide/iac.  This 
more  natural.  His  last  words  not  an  assertion  of  divin- 
ity but  trust.  He  resigns  himself  to  his  Father.  Taken 
from  Ps.  31 :  5. 

These  seven  utterances  have  a  literature  of  their  own. 
Notice,  1.  how  many  come  from  O.  T.;  2.  how  wonderful 
their  comprehensiveness;  3.  how  natural  their  sequence. 
He  who  exhausts  them  has  little  to  know  ahout  either 
covenant. 

The  first  is  a  prayer  for  pardon  of  his  enemies. 

Second,  Shows  judgment  and  saving  power. 

Third,  Christ's  tender  care  for  his  people. 

Fourth,  Depth  of  punishment  for  sin. 

Fifth,  His  humanity  and  physical  suffering. 

Sixth,  His  triumphant  victory. 

Seventh,  His  trust  in  God. 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  four  Evangelists  avoid  the 
expression,  "he  died."  They  say,  "He  gave  up  the  ghost." 
It  was  a  voluntary  act.  • 

§156.  Supernatural  accompaniments  continued..  Impression 
on  different  classes  of  witnesses.  (Mt.  27  :  51-56  ;  Mk.  15  : 
38-41  ;  Lk.  23 :  45,  47-49.)  The  veil  of  temple  rent, 
earthquake,  graves  opened  and  dead  raised.  Luke  puts 
rending  of  veil  before  statement  of  Christ's  death.  The 
same  word  used  in  LXX.  for  both  inner  and  outer  veil. 
Means  here,  inner  veil.  Denied,  because  1.  known  only 
to  priests,  who  would  not  tell,  and  2.  not  referred  to  later 
in  N.  T.  Naturalistic  interpreters  describe  it  as  effect 
of  earthquake  upon  veil  old  or  tender  or  fastened  at  four 
corners.    Tradition  in  Gospel  of  the  Hebrews  says  a  beam 


186 

fell  against  it.  Its  meaning  is  plain.  The  typical  system 
is  ended.  All  believers  are  now  priests  and  may  enter 
tiirough  the  Veil  to  the  Holiest  of  Holies  (Heb.  10  :  19). 
Earthquake  and  grave-opening  mentioned  by  Mt.  alone. 
Objected  1.  That  this  resurrection  of  saints  was  never 
appealed  to  later.  2.  What  became  of  them  ?  3.  What 
was  the  use  of  it  ?  Some  try  to  destroy  the  text.  Some 
say  earthquake  opened  graves,  which  were  found  empty, 
hence  the  report.  (Farrar.)  Others,  it  was  all  visionary. 
Strauss,  all  mythical  ;  they  had  not  yet  separated  second 
advent  from  first.  Do  the  words  "after  his  resurrection" 
qualify  their  leaving  the  graves  or  their  going  into  the 
city?  Most  place  all  after  his  resurrection,  because  1. 
Christ  is  called  the  lirst-fruits,  and  2.  His  resurrection 
necessary  to  new  life  of  the  saints.  How  did  they  rise  ? 
Was  it  in  physical  bodies  to  die  again?  Most  likely  in 
resurrection  bodies  —  recognizable — not  to  live  with 
men,  but  to  ascend  with  Christ.  Who  were  they  ?  Some 
say  those  recently  dead,  or  they  would  not  have  been 
recognized.  Others  say  0.  T.  Patriarchs  and  prophets. 
Tradition  gives  their  names.  Meaning  clear  :  The  sacri- 
fice now  made  is  victory  over  death.  Schaff:  "So  much 
only  appears  certain  to  us  that  it  was  a  supernatural  and 
symbolic  event  which  proclaimed  the  truth  that  the  death 
and  resurrection  of  Christ  was  a  victory  over  death  and 
Hades,  and  opened  the  door  to  everlasting  life."  The 
centurion  and  soldiers,  after  Christ's  last  cry  (Mk.),  and 
the  supernatural  accompaniments  (Mt.)  say  "  Truly  this 
was  the  Son  of  God."  Luke  gives,  "  certainly  this  was 
a  righteous  man."  Some  say  the  words  must  be  taken 
in  heathen  sense,  i.  e.  a  demi-god  (So  Meyer).  More 
common  opinion  is  that  the  centurion  had  some  knowl- 
edge and  this  is  incipient  faith.  At  all  events  he  is  con- 
vinced that  Christ  is  true.  He  is  the  precursor  of  Cor- 
nelius, the  first  fruits  of  Gentiles  acknowledging  the 
Savior.  We  have  important  witness  to  truth  of  these 
details.  The  mass  of  the  people  are  impressed.  Stricken 
with  terror  and  remorse,  they  smote  their  breasts  and 
returned  (Lk.  23  :  48).  Representatives  of  Israel  and 
the  Centurion  of  the  Gentiles  are  witnesses  to  the  fact 
and  power  of  his  death.  The  friends  of  Christ  are  also 
present.     Lk.  says  "  all  his  acquaintance."     Mt.  and  Mk. 


187 

specify  names  of  some  of  the  women.  By  these  friends 
the  knowledge  of  his  teaching  is  preserved  and  handed 
down.     All  classes  are  witnesses. 

§157.  Taking  down  from  the  Cross  and  Burial.  Two 
striking  fulfillments  of  prophecy  seen  in  a  departure  both 
from  Roman  and  Jewish  usage.  The  Roman  custom 
was  to  leave  the  bodies  hanging  until  devoured  by  birds. 
Jews  of  course  did  not.  (Deut.  21  :  23).  And  the  Sab- 
bath was  an  "High  Day."  Bleek:  "High  Day"  be- 
cause the  first  day  of  the  Feast,  or  Nisan  15.  But  if  it 
were  the  second  or  16th  of  Nisan,  the  day  on  which 
the  offerings  were  brought  to  the  Temple — and  from 
which  Pentecost  was  reckoned,  it  would  also  be  an 
"  High  Day:' 

Did  the  Jews  know  that  Jesus  had  died?  Not  told. 
If  they  did,  the  request  was  for  the  thieves.  This  break- 
ing of  the  legs  was  for  torture.  It  was  only  the  usual 
adjunct  of  Crucifixion.  There  is  no  evidence  that  this  was 
the  "  merc_y  stroke,''  for  more  merciful  means  were  in  use  ; 
as  the  stab,  &c.  It  seems  to  have  been  rather  for  ad- 
ditional torture  and  ignominy.  Possibly  they  had  in 
mind,  the  prophecy  implied  in  Exod.  12  :  46 — "  Neither 
shall  ye  break  a  bone  thereof" — and  wished  to  disprove 
thereby  his  Messiahship.  Some  argue  from  John  19: 
32  that  a  new  body  of  soldiers  were  employed  in  this. 
But  the  message  was  sufficient.  They  broke  the  legs  of 
the  two  thieves  first ;  probably  because  on  the  outside. 
One  of  the  soldiers  thrust  a  lance  into  the  side  of  Jesus, 
to  make  sure  of  his  actual  death.  It  was  an  easier  and 
more  certain  mode  than  the  breaking  of  his  legs.  As 
already  dead,  there  was  no  need  of  torture.  Thus  were 
these  soldiers  witnesses  of  the  reality  of  his  death. 

It  has  been  argued  against  John's  recording  this  inci- 
dent, that  "  no  one  doubted  Christ's  death  in  his  day." 
Ans  :  1.  Even  if  true,  the  fact  of  his  death  is  so  im- 
portant that  John  would  not  omit  it.  And  the  Corin- 
thians did  deny  his  real  death  already.  Its  bearing  in 
our  own  day  is  obvious.  2.  It  proves  the  reality  of  the 
body  of  Christ  against  the  Docet?e.  John  himself  says 
he  did  it  to  confirm  the  faith  of  his  readers  :  a.  Neither 
shall  ye  break  a  bone  thereof."  Ex.  12  :  46.  Ps.  34  : 
30.      h.  "  They    shall    look    on    him    whom    they    have 


188 

pierced."  Zech.  12 :  10.  The  main  fact  is  the  lance- 
thrust  ;  the  flow  of  blood  and  water  is  secondary  and 
confirmatory,  therefore  not  miraculous.  No  symbolical 
meaning  dwelt  on  but  (I.  John  5 :  b)  itself  a  symbol  of 
the  atoning  and  cleansing  power  of  Christ's  blood. 
Rationalists  who  deny  the  reality  of  his  death  deny  the 
spear-thrnst,  or  pronounce  it  superficial.  This  is  contrary 
to  the  words  themselves — to  the  intention  and  to  the 
.invitation  to  Thomas — John  20 :  27.  It  was  probably 
the  left  side,  as  that  was  surer  death,  and  it  accounts  for 
the  blood  and  water.  The  thrust  nearly  horizontal  and 
but  slightly  inclined  upward.  The  nature  of  this  flow 
is  included  in  the  wider  question — what  was  the  physical 
cause  of  his  death  ? 

1.  Miraculoiis  Theory,  held  by  the  Reformers,  Fathers, 
Meyer,  &c.  If  his  death  was  miraculous,  so  was  proba- 
bly the  flow  of  blood  and  water.  The  natural  arguments 
are  a.  his  speedy  death  ;  his  strength  of  body  and  mind 
10  the  end;  the  expectation  of  the  Jews  that  he  would 
linger.  Pilate's  surprise  at  the  report  of  his  death,  h. 
The  terms  employed:  "-He  gave  up  the  spirit."  c. 
The  words  of  Jesus  :  John  19  :  11  and  10  :  18.  d.  Argu- 
ment from  the  divine  nature.  Also  the  frequent  IST.  T. 
expression  "  he  died  for  us."  The  Jews  slew  him,  which 
would  not  be  true  if  he  died  from  natural  causes. 

2.  The  spear  thrust — the  cause  of  his  death.  Founded 
on  a  reading  of  Mt.  27  :  49;  supported  by  B.  C.  L.  and 
Cod.  Sin.  But  it  is  an  interpolation  and  contradicts 
John  Griiner's  view.  His  heart  was  pierced  before  death. 
The  water  was  from  the  pericardium.  Debility  and 
anxiety  produced  eft'usion  before  his  death.  Ans  : 
The  physiological  facts  are  disputed,  and  the  narrative 
plainly  implies  death  before  the  lance-thrust. 

3.  Weakness.  To  the  objection  that  it  was  too  sudden, 
they  answer:  The  perfection  of  his  organization,  or 
mental  anguish.  What  then  of  the  blood  and  water  ? 
a.  If  the  heart  was  pierced,  there  would  be  no  flow  from 
it.  5.  Extravasations.  (^,  The  Bertholines  argue  a  bloody 
serum  in  the  cavity  of  the  chest.  Fact  is  disputed 
physiologically:  and  that  is  not  blood  and  water,  d. 
Lange's  idea  is  that  his  transformation  had  begun,  e. 
His  death  was  natural  but  the  blood  and  water  was 
miraculous. 


189 

4.  Stroud's  theory.  He  died  from  a  rapture  of  the  ven- 
tricle of  the  heart  produced  by  mental  agony.  Blood 
separated  in  the  thorax.  There  was  time  enough  and 
this  is  analogous  to  the  bloody  sweat  in  Gethsemane. 
Objection  :  The  blood  w^ould  be  coagulated.  A  coinci- 
dence of  his  death  and  the  knowledge  on  the  part  of 
Jesus  when  the  time  came.  But  he  may  have  spoken 
after  the  rupture  took  place,  or  he  may  have  been 
warned  by  an  increase  of  suffering.  A  difficulty  here  is 
met  in  the  words  of  the  Psalmist,  Ps.  16  :  10  in  connec- 
tion with  St.  Peter's  assertion  in  Acts  2  :  31  ;  "  Neither 
his  flesh  did  see  corruption."  Does  the  separation  of  the 
blood  imply  this  ?  Meyer  says  John  intends  to  describe 
it  as  miraculous.  But  compare  the  exegesis  above.  This 
view  an  elevated  one.  But  it  subjects  physical  to  moral 
causes.  If  Christ's  life  was  subject  to  physical  causes, 
so  by  analogy  should  be  his  death.  It  is  impossible  to 
decide  absolutely.  Comp.  Baur,  Strauss,  Hanna,  An- 
drews, Sir  J.  Simpson  and    Pseudo-John. 

The  Burial.  The  history  of  the  burial,  shows  a  series 
of  providences  to  adduce  witnesses  to  the  identity  of  the 
body  in  the  interval  before  Resurrection. 

He  was  laid  in  a  7ieivtomh.  Joseph  of  Arimatheaasks 
for  the  body.  John  alone  mentions  jSTicodemus  as  tak- 
ing part,  as  he  alone  mentions  him  before.  "  It  was  in 
the  power  of  governors  of  provinces  to  grant  private 
burial  to  criminals  at  the  request  of  friends;  and  it 
was  usually  done,  except  they  were  mean  or  infamous. 
But  for  Joseph,  Christ  would  probably  have  been  buried 
with  the  malefactors.  De  Wette  argues  that  verses  38  and 
31  are  inconsistent.  If  Joseph  came  //era  zauza  and 
o^rac— late  in  afternoon,  a.  how  could  Pilate  be  surprised 
that  he  was  already  dead  ?  and  b.  how  could  Joseph  go 
to  Pilate  before  the  body  was  taken  down  by  the 
soldiers  ?  Liicke  says  dpr]  means  to  take  away  to  burial. 
But  Syn.  say  Joseph  and  Nicodemus  took  him  doivn  from 
the  cross,  Lk.  23  :  53.  Mk.  15  :  46.  Friedlieb  says 
Joseph  asked  before  the  Jews — but  Pilate  waited  to  hear 
from  the  Centurion.  This  disregards  //era  zaoza.  Meyer 
— Jews'  request  was  first.  Then  the  trouble  is  to  find 
time  for  Joseph  to  act.  But  soldiers  would  wait  till  the 
malefactors'  death  before  taking  them  down.     Or  Joseph 


190 

may  have  followed  the  Jews  very  quickly.  Very  little 
time  was  necessary.  The  tombs  of  rich  families  were 
generally  in  a  rock,  hewn  with  the  mouth  so  as  to  go 
in  horizontally.  By  this  interment  in  the  new  tomb  of 
Joseph  of  Ariraathea  was  brought  about,  not  only  the 
fulfillment  of  prophecy,  but  also  a  proof  of  his  resurrec- 
tion. No  other  had  been  buried  there,  hence,  no  other 
could  rise  from  that  tomb.  As  early  as  Jerome  was  this 
fact  noticed  as  important.  He  compares  it  to  the  pure 
womb  of  the  Virgin  Mary. 

2.  He  was  embalmed.  If  they  had  not  known  he  was 
dead,  they  would  not  have  embalmed  his  body.  "One 
hundred  pounds  weight,"  extraordinary  quantity;  denotes 
great  honor.  There  is  no  proof  that  the  disciples  watched 
the  tomb.  Great  emphasis  is  laid  on  the  constancy  of 
the  women.  The  mother  of  Jesus  is  not  mentioned. 
The  incident  is  important  in  the  chain  of  testimony  to 
the  identity  of  his  body.  A  contradiction  as  to  the  time 
of  buying  spices  is  alleged.  Compare  Lk.  23  :  56  with 
Mk.  16  :  \.  'No  real  contradiction.  Some  may  have  been 
brought  at  one  time,  some  at  another,  or  some  on  both 
evenings.  But  it  is  asked  "  If  they  saw  the  burial  by 
Joseph  and  Mcodemus,  why  this  additional  anointing?" 
John  19:40  shows  that  Joseph's  was  used.  Nor  is  it 
probable  that  the  women  were  ignorant  of  the  first 
anointing.  No  real  difficulty.  It  was  a  new  proof  of 
love.  Becoming  that  the  last  sacred  ofiices  should  be 
performed  by  intimate  friends. 

Strauss  asks:  "  If  they  knew  the  tomb  was  sealed, 
and  a  watch  set,  how  did  they  expect  to  get  in  ?"  Some 
reply,  "  they  did  not  know."  But  the  body  was  in 
Joseph's  tomb  and  his  property:  to  be  watched,  but  not 
kept  by  the  soldiers. 

§158.  The  Watch  at  the  Sepulchre.  Saturday  Nisan  16. 
According  to  Bleek,  Nisan  15.  When  did  priests  apply 
to  Pilate  ?  On  Friday  evening — which  was  part  of  the 
Sabbath,  or  Saturday  morning  ?  Either  way  they  break 
the  Sabbath.  But  why  not  Saturday  night?  The  words 
force  the  conclusion  that  they  went  on  the  Sabbath. 
But  a  night  has  intervened.  There  is  however  no  break 
in  the  continuity  of  the  witness  for  identity.  The  Jews 
would  not  seal  an  empty  tomb.     They  would  make  sure 


191 

of  that.  The  prediction  was  that  he  would  rise  on  the 
third  day.  So  no  danger  of  his  being  stolen  till  the  3d 
day. 

bid  Pilate  mean  by  his  reply  "  Ye  have  a  watch,"  the 
band  of  Levites  comprising  the  Temple  watch,  or  the 
soldiers  who  crucified  him?  Better  to  understand  it  as 
imperative — "  Have  a  watch."  They  take  Roman  sol- 
diers. Meyer  singularly  discards  this  whole  account. 
His  objections  :  1.  That  Christ's  predictions  were  too 
enigmatical  to  be  known  by  the  priests.  Even  the  Apos- 
tles did  not  understand  them,  and  the  priests  did  not  get 
them  from  the  disciples  after  his  death,  for  they  were 
depressed  and  had  forgotten  the  prediction.  The  priests 
say  "  We  remember."  They  rtuuj  have  obtained  it  from 
believers  before  the  crucifixion.  At  any  rate  they  wish 
to  test  the  truth  of  it  ?  2  If  the  priests  feared  removal  of 
the  body  it  was  suicidal  to  allow  it  to  remain  in  custody 
of  friends.  But  they  did  not  fear  till  they  heard  the 
friends  had  the  body  and  then  took  immediate  precau- 
tions. If  the  body  was  taken  away  Pilate  would  punish 
the  soldiers  in  execution  of  Roman  Law.  But  they 
would  invent  an  improbable  lie.  He  argues  the  greater 
probability  is  against  the  truth  of  the  narrative.  Where- 
fore the  Greek  recension  of  Mt.  But  it  is  found  in  Mt. 
alone,  because  Alt.  wrote  for  Jews, 

This  Sabbath  was  indeed  a  final  day.  Lange  says  it 
was  not  the  last  Sabbath  of  the  old  economy  for  that  con- 
tinued till  Pentecost. 

From  thb  Resurrection  to  the  Ascension. 

The  length  is  not  given  in  the  Gospels.  They  record 
but  two  Sabbaths  and  a  journey  to  Galilee.  But  in  Acta 
1  :  3,  '•  for  forty  days,  //era  zb  Tza&elv  wjzbv"  forty  has 
some  significance.  It  was  practically  time  enough  to 
prove  the  resurrection.  Proofs  are  frequent  varied  and 
numerous.  We  can  trace  a  picture  of  the  subjective 
state  of  the  disciples.  Why  was  the  mode  of  our  Lord's 
communication  so  changed  ?  He  appears  only  at  inter- 
vals. Acts  1:3.  Of  course  then  not  still  in  state  of 
humiliation.  Had  there  been  no  change— resurrection 
would  have  been  more  doubted.  Again,  it  may  have 
been  to  change  the  feelings  of  the  disciples  towards  him. 


192 

Their  faith  and  love  to  him  must  be  made  as  great  as  to 
God,  by  his  total  absence  in  body  and  yet  spiritual  presence. 
Here  they  were  in  different  places  and  yet  all  present  in 
body  with  him  in  each  place.  This  shows  how  he  is 
with  us  now. 

The  nature  of  his  Resurrection  Body?  Three  an- 
swers: I.  Some  argue  with  Rob.  and  Meyer  that  it  was 
the  same  material  body  which  lay  in  the  tomb.  a. 
Nature  of  proofs  of  identity  :  Jesus  said  "  A  spirit  hath 
not  flesh  and  bones  as  ye  see  me  have."  Shows  his 
wounds  and  eats  with  them.  b.  The  ascension  was  the 
moment  for  transformation.  According  to  this,  his  trans- 
portation through  space, .  entering  through  the  closed 
doors,  &c.,  are  specific  miracles.  II.  The  change  to  a 
spiritual  body  occurred  at  Resurrection.  But  this  con- 
tradicts his  own  words.  Lk.  24  :  39.  III.  An  interme- 
diate condition  suited  to  the  period  of  transitions.  A 
material  body  but  endowed  with  new  properties.  We 
are  safe  only  in  holding  to  the  facts  which  are  :  1.  The 
body  was  the  same.  This  was  necessary  to  recognition. 
2.  Some  change  in  appearance  is  shown  by  the  tardy 
recognition.  This  is  partly  accounted  for  by  the  subjec- 
tive state  of  the  disciples,  partly  as  meant  by  him,  for 
Mk.  16  :  12  says,  "  ev  kzifia  nopcprj.''  3.  Either  super- 
naturally  endowed,  or  instrument  of  miraculous  power. 
4.  Not  fully  transformed.  '^  Flesh  and  blood  can  not  in- 
herit the  kingdom  of  God." 

Harmony.  We  have  four  accounts  from  different 
points  of  view,  none  complete.  It  is  not  a  continuous 
history  of  a  life,  but  a  series  of  disconnected  miraculous 
appearances,  hence  the  difficulty.  Doubtless,  too,  the 
stupendous  character  of  the  events  make  witnesses  con- 
fused. Again  all  is  not  recorded.  John  20  :  30.  Acts 
1 :  3.  Comp.  1  Cor.  15.  No  contradiction  can  be  estab- 
lished. Means  for  determining  the  exact  order  do  not 
exist  in  the  narrative.  General  traits  are  the  same.  The 
same  prominence  given,  in  all,  to  the  accounts  of  the 
women  and  the  angels.  The  same  messages  are  sent  to 
the  disciples.  The  very  differences  prove  the  simplicity 
of  the  witnesses.  So  in  general  differences.  It  is  re- 
markable that  Mt.  should  narrate  only  the  events  which 
occurred  in   Galilee,    while  Mk.  and  Lk.  those  in  Jud. 


193 

and  Jerus.,  John  givins^  both,  ch.  20  being  hiid  in  Jeras. 
and  ch.  21  in  Gal.  Rationalists  ascribe  this  to  mixed 
tradition.  But  it  is  really  a  striking  proof  of  the  very 
opposite;  and  can  be  accounted  for  only  b}-  the  special 
design  of  each.  Mt.  depicts  the  royal  majestj'  of  the 
risen  Lord,  contrasted  with  Jewish  expectations  and  con- 
fines himself  to  Gal.  as  in  his  ministry.  Beino:  opposed 
to  Judaism,  his  record  is  out  of  Jerus.  Mk.  establishes 
the  fact  of  the  resurrection  by  the  transition  in  the  mind 
of  the  disciples  from  doubt  to  fixith,  the  risen  Son  of 
God  working  on  his  church  by  his  power  througli  the 
ministers  of  his  word.  Lk.  connects  resurrection  with 
the  sufferings  and  the.  unity  of  the  two  and  presents 
Christ  as  the  great  High  Priest — the  Redeemer  of  all 
men,  proclaiming  remission  to  all  nations  beginning  at 
Jerus.  In  John  is  shown  the  effect  on  the  inner  circle  of 
believers — the  relation  of  the  resurrection  to  the  faith 
and  life  of  the  individual. 

N.  B.  (For  the  order  of  the  several  Evangelists  see 
Diagram). 

Resulting  Difficulties:  1.  The  time  of  the  visit  of  the 
women.  Mt.  says  "at  the  end  of  the  Sabbath."  Hence, 
it  is  argued  it  was  at  sunset.  But  rather,  early  in  the 
morning.  All  say  very  early.  Mk.  says  however  the  sun 
was  risen,  or  else  Mk.  contradicts  himself.  Or  we  may 
say  one  account  may  date  from  the  time  of  starting  and 
the  other  from  arrival. 

2.  Mt.  and  John  do  not  give  the  object  of  their  going: 
but  this  is  manifest.  Mk.  and  Lk.  distinctly  say  to 
anoint  his  body. 

3.  Mt.  seems  to  imply  that  they  saw  the  earthquake 
and  the  stone  rolled  away.  Rob.  suggests  a  pluperfect 
sense.  This  is  impossible.  Aorists,  however,  are  indefi- 
nite. He  don't  say  it  then  occurred.  Some  understand 
the  earthquake  figuratively.  The  mere  mention  of  this 
is  its  refutation.  The  fathers  say  Christ  left  the  tomb 
before  the  stone  was  rolled  away — as  he  needed  no  help 
to  rise.  Henry  says.  Angels  aided  him  as  token  of  their 
loyalty.  Remark,  thej'  shall  assist  in  the  general  resur- 
rection. The  act  of  resurrection  was  seen  by  none. 
Only  friends  beheld  the  resurrected  Lord.  In  regard  to 
the  other  difiiculties  ;  older  harmonists  took  every  thing 


194 

as  a  different  aeconnt  and  so  give  various  companies  of 
women,  &f'.  Others  make  but  one  group.  Ebrard  says 
the  main  point  in  all  was  the  appearance  of  Christ  to  the 
XI.  Before,  all  was  prefator3^  He  gives  as  illustration  : 
"  A  friend  of  mine  is  at  the  point  of  death.  I  am  just 
returning  from  a  journey.  On  my  way  I  am  met  in  suc- 
cession by  different  friends  :  One  tells  me  of  his  illness, 
two  others  inform  me  of  his  death,  a  fourth  gives  me  a 
ring  which  he  has  bequeathed  to  me.  I  hasten  to  the 
house  and  find  a  mournful  scene.  On  my  return  I  write 
to  an  acquaintance,  and  with  the  scene  at  the  house  most 
vivid  in  my  mind,  I  write  briefly  of  the  rest,  that  on 
my  wa}^  home  I  met  four,  friends  who  told  me  of  his 
death  and  gave  a  ring.  Of  what  importance  to  the 
reader,  whether  all  came  together,  or  successively  or 
which  brought  the  ring?" 

4.  While  John  speaks  of  Mary  Mag.  alone,  Syn. 
represent  others.  Mt.  Mary  Mag.  and  another  Mary. 
Mk.  adds  Salome.  Lk.  mentions  two  Marys,  Joanna  and 
others,  a.  Ebrard  takes  John  as  fact.  But  Syn.  group 
her  visit  with  others,  b.  Lange,  Westcott,  Ores,  and 
others  separate  Lk.  and  suppose  two  companies.  One 
led  by  Mary  Mag.,  the  other  by  Joanna.  This  is  im- 
probable, as  Lk.  mentions  Mary  Mag.  himself,  and  leaves 
the  difficulty  with  John.  More  probably  Lk.  is  with  the 
other  Syn.  c.  Lightfoot,  Eob.,  &c.,  say  all  came  together 
and  John  specifies  Mary  Mag.  to  tell  individual  faith. 

5.  How  many  visions  of  angels  ?  Syn.  record  as  if  the 
women  at  first  saw  the  angels.  John  as  if  they  appeared 
to  Mary  Mag.  on  the  second  coming.  Clearly  two  ap- 
pearances of  angels.  John  confines  his  narrative  to  Mary 
Mag.  who  ran  back  to  the  disciples  before  actually  reach- 
ing the  sepulchre.  Lightfoot  combines  them  all  into  one. 
Those  who  have  two  companies  make  three  visions. 

6.  Number  of  angels.  Mt.  gives  one  sitting  outside. 
Mk.  one  inside.  Some  say  the  stone  was  rolled  inward 
so  Mt.  agrees  with  the  others.  Some  say  it  was  in  the 
vestibule.  Some,  there  were  two  angels.  Either  they 
did  not  see  the  aiigels  till  they  were  inside,  or  the  angels 
moved.  Lk.  says  "they  stood"  which  WM?/mean  as  some 
render  "  appeared  suddenly."  John  says  Mary  Mag.  saw 
two  angels.     This  is  a  distinct  vision.     So  Lk.  also  gives 


195 

two.  If  two  companies  there  is  no  question  :  if  one — 
there  is  no  contradiction.  The  explanation  seems  to  be  : 
There  was  one  main  fact, — a  vision  of  angels — more  ac- 
curately, of  two  angels. 

7.  Message  of  angels.  In  Mt.  and  Mk.  the  angel  tells 
them  to  meet  Jesus  in  Gal.  This  is  natural,  as  Alt's 
narrative  is  Galilean.  Lk.  reminds  them  of  his  words  in 
Gal.  Jolm  records  the  message  as  given  by  Jesus  him- 
self, to  Mary  Mag.  Here  those  who  make  two  compa- 
nies have  no  difficulties,  nor  those  of  one  companj^  either, 
as  each  tells  what  his  plan  demands.  Each  account  calls 
to  mind  an  empty  sepulchre  as  the  first  witness.  The 
angels  point  to  it,  and  this  accounts  for  Mary  Mag.'s  haste 
at  her  first  visit.  The  angels  first  announce  the  fact  "  The 
Lord  is  risen  "  as  a  report  from  heaven.  That  the 
angels  appear  and  disappear  in  a  remarkable  manner  is 
insisted  on  by  those  who  make  these  mere  visions,  and 
hence  all  dependent  on  the  subjective  state  of  the  wit- 
nesses. If  so,  how  is  it  that  the  keepers  see  the  angels? 
This  is  to  prove  that  the  stone  was  not  moved  by  the 
earthquake.  The  disciples  do  not  see  them,  beciluse  their 
faith  is  to  be  tried  before  they  can  be  constituted  eye  wit- 
nesses of  the  truth  to  the  church.  They  must  themselves 
experience  difficulties  of  faith  in  what  seemed  to  them 
disputable.  The  whole  question  of  vision  of  angels  ad- 
mits of  a  very  easy  explanation  on  the  ground  of  simple 
natural  variety  of  accounts.  Lessing  says  :  "  Do  you  not 
see  that  the  Evangelists  do  not  count  the  angels  ?  There 
were  millions  of  angels  around  the  tomb."  Lange  : 
"  These  harmonies  are  in  the  form  of  a  four-voiced 
narrative,  and  indicate  an  agitated  state  of  the  Evan- 
gelists." 

8.  Did  Christ  appear  to  Mary  Mag.  alone  or  to  more  ? 
Sceptics  argue  much  from  the  ease  with  which  women 
are  deceived.  The  great  fact  of  the  Resurrection  of 
Christ  was  to  rest  on  testimony ;  so  it  is  first  to  come  to 
the  disciples  in  that  form,  to  subject  them  to  trial  and 
discipline  them.  This  is  prominent  throughout.  Angels 
bear  witness  to  the  women — they  to  the  Apostles — they 
to  the  world.  Mt.  makes  tAvo  Marys  meet  Jesus,  iu 
company  with  all  the  women.  But  John  says  Jesus  met 
Mary  Mag.  alone   on    her  return    to  the  city.     Mk.  says 


196 

"  He  appeared  first  to  Mary  Ma_^."  There  are  three  ex- 
planations :  1.  Lightfoot,  &c.,  make  but  one  appearance 
and  that  to  Mary  Mag.  alone.  Mt.  generalizes.  The 
appearance  was  to  Mary  but  he  says  "  to  the  women." 
2.  Lange,  Ores.,  two  appearances,  the  first  to  Mary  : 
Strauss  objects  on  ground  of  time.  He  says  "  Where 
are  the  women  all  this  time?"  Do  they,  as  some  say, 
linger  near  the  tomb,  or  do  thej^  go  back  to  the  city,  or 
is  it  as  Gres.  supposes,  a  week  before  Christ  appears  to 
the  other  women?  Most  of  us  are  content  to  say  we  are 
responsible  only  for  the  succession  of  events  and  don't 
care  what  the  women  were  doing.  Rob.  says  there  were 
two  appearances,  but  the  first  was  to  the  women.  Mk's 
statement  that  Mary  was  first  is  but  relative— i.  e.,  the 
first  of  the  three  recorded  by  him.  But  Mk.  is  too 
emphatic  to  admit  of  any  such  explanation. 

9.  According  to  Mt.,  Lk.  and  John,  the  women  go  im- 
mediately in  joy  to  the  Apostles.  Mk.  says  doosi^c  duoip 
iiTTou.  Admission  into  two  companies  is  artificial.  Mk's 
obvious  meaning  is  they  did  not  stop  to  tell  every  body 
they  met. 

§163.  Mari/  Magdalene  summons  Peter  and  Jo) ai.  While 
the  women  are  with  the  angels,  Mary  Mag.  has  gone  to 
call  John  and  Peter.  There  is  a  significance  in  their 
being  together  and  Mary's  going  to  them.  "  Theyounger 
reaches  the  tomb  first  "  says  Harte.  Peter  impidske  is  the 
first  to  rush  in.-  There  they  find  the  linen  clothes  lying. 
Kot  carried  away  at  if  the  body  had  been  stolen,  or 
as  if  the  death  of  Christ  were  an  imposition  and  he  had 
escaped  :  but  neatly  folded,  and  laid  away,  indicative  of 
tranquillity.  John  "  saw  and  believed  " — what  ?  that 
the  tomb  was  empty  ?  No!  but  in  the  full  significance 
of  the  scene.  Lk.  makes  Peter  stoop.  John  very 
vividly  describes  himself  as   stooping  and  looking  in. 

§164.  Jes^is  appears  to  3Iary  Macjdedene.  Mary  is  con- 
spicuous as  of  a  most  loving  spirit.  She  is  standing 
weeping — and  does  not  share  the  faith  of  John — and  a 
man  appears.  She  does  not  at  once  recognize  him.  This 
indicates  a  change  in  external  appearance  or  Mary  would 
have  known  him.  It  also  confirms  the  reality  of  the 
resurrection.  If  it  were  a  mere  subjective  vision,  she 
would   have   thouficht  it   to  be  Christ  at  first.     This  and 


197 

the  walk  to  Ernmaus  are  fatal  to  the  visionary  theory. 
Notice  the  peculiar  inconsistence  of  Strauss.  He  says 
"  A  myth  originating  in  Gal.  some  time  after  Christ's 
death.  It  grew  out  of  a  growing  reverence  for  Christ 
and  a  study  of  Messianic  prophecies."  But  how  does  it 
suit  Br.  Strauss  to  account  for  Mary's  seeing  Christ 
here?  Her  idea  cannot  be  accounted  for  on  this  theory, 
for.  she  had  no  thought  of  the  resurrection  and  Strauss 
says  Christ  had  never  predicted  it ! 

"Touch  me  not."  The  rebuke  is  to  Mary's  mistake. 
She  supposed  that  ordinary  intercourse  was  to  be  re- 
newed. Jesus  warns  her  that  it  is  not  to  be  so.  He 
virtually  says,  "No  longer  is  sense,  but  faith,  to  be  the 
mode  of  communion."  iSo  when  he  said  to  the  eleven  and 
Thomas,  "  Handle  me,"  there  is  no  inconsistency, 
as  then  he  wished  to  convince  them  of  his'  bodily  identity. 
Mary  is  here  already  convinced  of  that. 

§162.  Jesus  meets  the  women.  Mt.  says  Jesus  met  the 
women  and  gave  them  the  message;  how  can  we  recon- 
cile that  with  this?  Some  argue  that  they  are  the  same 
occurrence.  But  it  is  better  to  regard  them  as  different. 
Three  Evangelists  distinctly  state  that  the  Apostles  did 
not  believe  the  report  of  the  women.  This  is  natural. 
It  doubtless  sounded  strange  to  them  that  the  women 
alone  saw  what  Peter  and  John  did  not  see.  They  were 
in  a  state  of  fear  and  excitement. 

§165.  The  Report  of  the  Watch.  Reported  by  Mt.  only 
as  he  alone  gave  the  account  of  its  being  set.  The  oifer 
of  bribes  to  the  soldiers.  The  story  is  incredible  on  the 
face  of  it.  It  was  impossible  for  the  disciples  to  steal  the 
body.  Grotius  collects  evidence  of  its  currency  among 
the  Jews  in  the  2nd  and  3rd  centuries,  and  says  it  was 
still  believed  by  them !  Strauss  objects  :  "  Is  it  likely 
that  the  whole  Sanhedrim  at  a  regular  meeting  would 
unite  in  giving  official  sanction  to  a  lie  ?"  Ebrard 
replies:  "Is  it  likely  that  the  whole  Sanhedrim  at  a  regular 
meeting  would  unite  in  a  judicial  murder? — The  mar- 
vel is  what  pious,  conscientious  men  the  San.  become  in 
the  hands  of  Dr.  Strauss.  The  whole  of  Christendom,  a 
multitude  of  humble,  quiet  men,  may  have  devised  and 
adhered  tenaciously  to  a  bare-faced  lie  ;  but  the  murder- 
ers of  Jesus  were  incapable  of  persuading  these  soldiers 


198 

to  propagate  a  trilling  untruth,  which  their  own  conduct 
had  rendered  necessary!"  The  priests  believed  the  res- 
urrection, as  they  knew  of  the  empty  tomb,  not  with  a 
full  faith,  but  as  they  had  ah-eady  witnessed  many  mira- 
cles. Their  consciences  were  uneasy.  The  Apostles  do 
not  refer  to  this  because  they  had  better  proofs,  and  this 
lie  was  not  current  in  the  places  to  v;hich  they  were 
sent.  Why  not  mentioned  in  Acts  4?  Because  the 
Sanhedrim  did  not  deny  the  resurrection  in  their  earlier 
persecutions. 

§166.  Jesus  seen  of  Peter.  The'i^m-go  to  Emmaiis.  The 
third  appearance,  and  first  to  an  Apostle,  was  to  Peter 
after  the  two  went  to  Emmaus  :  Lk.  24:  34;  I.  Cor. 
15:5.  An  honor  to  Peter  considering  his  denial,  and 
intended  as  a  help  to  his  repentance.  The  walk  to 
Emmaus  shows  the  feeling  of  the  disciples.  The  mis- 
take of  these  men  and  tlieir  non-recognition  are  incom- 
patible with  the  visionary  theory.  Who  were  the  two  ? 
Wies.,  &c.  understand  Cleopas  to  be  Alphaeus  (Mt.  10:3), 
and  the  other,  the  Apostle  James  his  son.  This  is  not 
probable.  Lightfoot  thinks  the  second  person  was  Peter. 
Some,  that  he  was  Luke.  Discrepancy:  Mk.  says  their 
report  is  not  believed  ;  Lk.  that  the  eleven  anticipated 
them  with  "  The  Lord  is  risen  indeed  and  hath  appeared 
unto  Simon."  Therefore  they  did  believe.  The  ques- 
tion of  Harmony  is  interesting,  as  on  it  turns  the  point, 
whether  the  Apostles  believed  at  all  on  testimony,  or 
remained  unbelieving  till  they  saw  for  themselves.  The 
margin  of  th^  E.  V.  "makes  Mk.'s  statement  a  question, 
which  has  little  foundation.  Some  say  they  believed 
Peter,  but  could  not  believe  the  two  from  Emmaus,  as 
it  was  a  seeming  contradiction  that  Christ  should  be  seen 
by  both.  If  this  is  a  true  solution  it  remains  that  all  but 
Peter  (and  Thomas)  believed  upon  testimony.  The  two 
going  to  Emmaus  betray  a  dim  idea  that  the  third  day 
should  bring  some  change  and  yet  it  was  almost  ended. 
The  breaking  of  bread  probably  not  Lord's  Supper. 
The  instructions  of  Jesus  to  the  two  agree  with  Lk's  re- 
port of  the  words  of  the  angels. 

§167.  Jesus  appears  to  the  Ajmstles.  Thomas  absent. 
Sunday  evening.  Most  important  and  perhaps  most  de- 
cisive for  then  were  their  doubts  finally  overcome,  and 


199 

they  are  appointed  witnesses  t'oi-  the  future.  Given  by 
Mk.,  Lk.,  John,  Paul,  Mk.  and  Lk.  close  their  narra- 
tive here,  as  the  last  essential  thing.  Mk.  introduces  a 
third  appearance  ;  Lk.  shows  his  bodil}'  presence, — the 
nature  of  his  resurrection,  body  and  the  scars  of  his 
crucifixion.  The  question  now  was  not  the  fact  of  his 
resurrection  but  the  reality  and  identity  of  his  body. 
They  were  at  their  evening  nietd,  perhaps  in  the  room 
where  they  kept  the  passover.  Coming  through  closed 
doors — Lutherans  say  it  shows  the  ubiquity  of  Christ's 
person.  The  point  of  the  visit  was  ti)  show  that  he  was 
not  a  spirit.  He  declares  his  body  to  be  "■  flesh  and 
bones."  Handling  him  was  an  important  evidence.  (1 
John  1  :  1).  Lk.  adds  a  crowning  evidence  in  Christ's 
eating.  It  is  commonly  accepted  that  it  was  not  for 
nourishment,  but  as  evidence  of  his  material  body. 
The  identity  of  his  body  could  not  be  better  proved. 

The  Apostolic  Commission  is  now  given,  which  shows 
the  spiritual  import  of  the  resurrection.  It  was  because 
they  were  personally  convinced  that  they  are  made  wit- 
nesses. Paul  (1  Cor.  15:  5)  speaks  of  Twelve.  Syn. 
give  eleven.  Clear  and  important  that  other  Christians 
were  present  as  ixa&rjTac.  The  two  from  Emmaus  were 
plainly  present.  Thus  the  powers  here  conferred  were  not 
conlined  to  apostles  alone.  Was  the  commission  given 
to-night?  Mk.  and  Lk.  add  it  here  as  the  last  thing. 
Van  Oos.  puts  it  after  v.  44.  John  leaves  no  doubt  that 
the  commission  was  given  here.  So  it  was  twice  given. 
The  commission  to  witness,  preach  and  administer  dis- 
cipline was  based  on  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost  as 
authority.  John  says  -he  breathed  on  them,  and  saith 
"  Receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost."  This  was  in  consequence 
of  the  resurrection.  It  was  not  however  plenary,  but 
partial  and  preparatory,  corresponding  to  their  wants  till 
Pentecost.  There  was  need  of  it  ;  they  were  passing 
through  a  critical  period.  A  transition  from  doubt  to 
faith.  They  had  still  to  gather  and  guide  the  body  of 
disciples  till  Pentecost.  (IST.  B.  The  distinction  between 
Tcveofxa  dycov  here  and  to  nvebjia  ajtov  in  Acts  is  untenable). 
Strauss  says  the  command  to  tai-ry  at  Jerus.  (in  Lk.)  con- 
tradicts the  command  to  go  to  Gal.  Van  Oos.  and  Alf. 
say  this  command  was  not  given  till  after  the  return  from 


200 

Gal.  Bnt  there  is  no  inconsistency.  One  qualifies  the 
other.  The  "  tarry  "  qualifies  the  Commission.  Make 
Jerus.  your  headquarters,  and  do  not  go  to  preach  till 
after  Pentecost. 

§168.  Jesus  appears  to  the  Twelve.  Thomas  present. 
Time  2d  Sabbath.  John  alone  records  it.  1.  IIovv  came 
the  apostles  still  in  Jerusalem  ?  a.  They  would  not  travel 
during  the  feast,  which  lasted  till  Friday,  b.  Some  think 
unbelief  kept  them.  Thomas  and  others  still  doubted. 
c.  Others  suppose  the  command  to  go  was  accompanied 
by  an  intimation  as  to  when  and  how.  2.  Why  together 
on  the  first  day  of  the  week  ?  To  commemorate  the  res- 
urrection ?  Certainly  it  is  the  beginning  of  the  Christ- 
ian Sabbath.  They  meet  Christ  on  these  days  only.  The 
force  of  their  example  is  sanctioned  by  Christ.  What 
was  Thomas's  reception  ?  Jesus  commends  Thomas  for 
faith,  but  shows  there  is  a  higher  faith  based  on  spiritual 
evidences  and  shows  the  danger  of  subjecting  faith  to 
sense  or  reason.  Thomas  is  convinced  before  putting  his 
test  to  practice,  and  joyfully  believes. 

An  important  point:  that  the  claim  of  Divinity  is 
variously  made  elsewhere,  but  here  onlj-  in  the  Gospels 
is  ^£oc  applied  to  Christ  by  the  disciples  or  accepted  by 
him.  The  Gospel  of  John  begins:  "The  word  was 
God  "  and  closes  with  "  My  Lord  and  My  God  !" 

§169.  Jesus  appears  to  seven  Apostles  on  the  sea  of 
Tiberias.  By  most  harmonists  put  before  Mt.'s  narrative 
because  of  Jna  21 :  14.  The  charge  of  Meyer  that  Paul's 
statement  (I.  Cor.  15  :  5-7),  cannot  be  reconciled  is  not 
sustained.  One  explanation  is  that  Paul  includes  under 
the  expression  "seen  of  the  twelve,"  the  three  of  John; 
or  it  may  be  that  Paul  summarizes.  The  first  appear- 
ance would  be  at  the  grave,  then  at  Jerus.  in  vicinity  of 
the  tomb.  But  it  must  not  be  confined  to  Jerus.  as  the 
witness  is  to  extend  to  hundreds  of  believers  in  Gal.  It 
is  also  to  show  the  bodily  relations  of  Jesus ;  he  was 
superhuman  as  to  extension.  Again,  by  this  he  corrects 
the  mistaken  idea  of  the  disciples,  that  the  new  Dispen- 
sation should  be  also  a  Theocracy  in  Jerus.  Comp.  Acts 
1.  Disciples  had  gone  to  Gal.  and  returned  to  their 
daily  occupation.  Early  in  the  morning  Christ  appears 
on  the  shore  and  repeats  the  miracle  that  had  called  them 


201 

at  first — thus  reinstating  them.  A  promise  of  great  suc- 
cess in  their  work  is  seen  in  the  number  of  fishes  taken. 
There  is  no  evidence  that  the  fire  and  the  bread  were 
miraculous.  They  were  significant  of  rest  after  toil.  The 
results  of  toil  give  joy.  Peter  is  especially  reinstated. 
The  three-fold  question  refers  to  the  denials:  "Simon, 
Son  of  Jonas!"  alludes  to  his  original  nature,  reminding 
him  of  his  unrenewed  state.  Notice  the  comparison 
"  more  than  these  "  based  on  "  though  all  should  forsake 
thee,  yet  will  not  I."  Peter's  humility,  appears  in  his 
not  using  the  comparison.  Peter  asserts  but  the  hum- 
bler personal  love,  (pdEco  ;  Jesus  used  the  higher,  ayoKoxo. 
but  at  last  descends  to  use  even  ipcXeco.  Notice  also  [a) 
lambs,  [b)  sheep,  {c)  little  sheep.  Also  notiiatvziv  and 
^oaxecv.  The  martyrdom  of  Peter  is  added  to  show  his 
confidence  in  Peter's  constancy.  When  this  book  was 
written  Peter  had  been  long  dead  and  there  is  a  reference 
to  John's  life  and  exemption  from  martyrdom.  Upon 
Jno.  21  :  24  is  based  a  strong. argument  for  the  author- 
ship of  the  book. 

§170.  Jesus  meets  the  Apostles  and  500  on  a  ynount  in  Gal. 
Paul,  I.  Cor.  15:  6.  This  is  the  same  as  Mt.'s  eleven. 
It  involves  the  question  whether  the  commission  was 
given  to  the  whole  church  or  not.  Not  so,  unless  others 
besides  the  eleven  were  present.  The  chief  evidence  is 
from  Mt.  himself:  1.  Why  appoint  a  meeting  on  a 
mount  in  Gal.  for  eleven  only  ?  2.  Mt.  says  some  w^or- 
shipped  but  some  doubted  like  Thomas.  3.  Mt.  28 :  7 
says  ^' there  shall  ye  see  him."  in  the  message  to  the 
women.  4.  There  is  reason  why  Mt.  should  emphasize 
the  eleven,  as  to  him  the  ecclesiastical  commission  was 
the  prominent  thing.  ]^otice,  they  went  where  they  were 
commanded,  hence  had  an  interesting  meeting.  A  for- 
tuitous gathering  is  inconceivable.  A  general  summons 
was  necessary.  The  21st  of  John  gives  us  the  probable 
occasion  of  the  command.  Compare  the  second  or  great 
commission  in  Mt.  with  John.  1.  This  (Mt.'s)  makes  no 
mention  of  suffering  or  of  the  reality  of  his  resurrection 
body.  2.  It  is  fuller  than  the  previous  one.  3.  Sets 
forth  the  completed  authority  of  Christ  as  its  basis.  In 
Acts  we  have  only  the  story  of  this  work.  This  Com- 
mission is  the  basis  of  the  Christian  sacrament  of  Bap- 
tism. 


202 

§171.  Our  Lord  is  seen  of  James,  then  of  all  the  Apostles. 
Which  James?  More  likely  James  of  Jerus.  than  the 
son  of  Zebeclee,  but  it  cannot  be  determined.  Luke  in 
Acts  implies  manifestations  which  are  not  recorded. 
Several  facts  are  gathered  from  Acts  1,  e.  g.that  Christ's 
mother  and  brethren  accompanied  him  to  Gal.  Addi- 
tional evidences  of  continued  false  expectations  on  part 
of  the  Apostles.  Again  they  are  to  tarry  in  Jerus.  till 
they  be  "  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost  not  many  days 
hence."  Also  the  order  of  the  conversion  of  the  world 
is  given  :  "Tn  Jerus.  and  in  all  Judea,  and  in  Samaria 
and  even  to  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth."  From 
the  climactic  advance  in  the  proofs  of  the  resurrection, 
we  find  a  final  argument  against  the  subjective  visionary 
theory.  No  such  thing  could  have  arisen  from  merely 
accidental  visions  to  different  persons. 

§172.  The  Ascension.  At  the  end  of  the  40  days  our 
Lord  once  more  appears.  It  is  at  Jerus.  He  ascends  in 
sight  of  the  disciples.  This  is  the  proper  conclusion  of 
the  record.  The  Ascension  is  necessarily  associated  with 
the  resurrection  for  there  could  be  no  more  death  to 
Christ.  He  must  ascend,  and  in  presence  of  the  dis- 
ciples. They  had  seen  him  appear  and  disappear  for  40 
days.  If  this  then  was  no  more  formal  than  those,  they 
would  be  continually  looking  for  him  to  return.  Even 
as  it  was  they  expected  him  ^o  come  again  in  their  own 
day.  Also  gives  a  definiteness  and  location  to  our  ideas 
of  a  risen  Lord  and  a  Christian  heaven.  We  cannot  now 
enter  into  the  difficulties  suggested  by  the  Lutherans  and 
others.  Concerning  the  sacraments — local  limitation, 
&c.,  can  only  touch  on  critical  objections.  Place  of  the 
Ascension :  An  apparent  contradiction  :  Bethany  (Lk.), 
Mount  of  Olives  (Acts).  But  they  are  so  near  to  each 
other  that  there  is  no  real  difficulty.  Was  it  visible  to 
others  than  disciples?  Hard  to  conceive  that  it  was. 
John  and  Mt.  don't  mention  the  ascension  at  all.  Only 
Mk.  and  Lk.  tell  of  it,  and  Tisch,  rejects  aveipeptro  from 
Lk.  Then  Acts  is  our  only  authority  for  a  visible  ascen- 
sion. But  Tisch.  is  not  followed  by  most  critics.  At 
any  rate,  it  is  in  Acts  which  is  by  Lk.  Mk.  and  Lk.  had 
a  special  object  in  recording  it.  Both  show  Christ  as  the 
Savior  of  the  world  and  look  to  the  future  history  of  the 


203 

church.  And  though  Mt.  and  John  omit  it,  yet  they 
refer  to  it  in  the  Gospel.  The  going  away  is  not  the 
iinal  point,  for  he  is  to  come  again. 

Mk.  seems  to  connect  the  ascension  immediately  with 
the  first  interview  with  the  eleven  on  the  resurrection 
Sunday.  Lk.  seems  to  imply  the  same  thing.  It  is  after  . 
the  report  of  the  two  from  Emmaus.  (Though  in  Acts 
it  is  "  after  40  days)."  Upon  this  is  based  the  theory  of 
repeated  ascensions.  Baur  says  Evangelists  teach  that 
Christ's  abode  after  the  resurrection  was  in  heaven.  So 
some  Harmonists.  The  sceptics  say  there  were  two  tra- 
ditions of  his  Ascension.  One  on  the  first  Sunday— and 
another  (Galilean)  after  an  interval  of  40  days.  But 
notice,  the  difliculty  cannot  be  so  great,  or  Lk.  is  at  dis- 
cord with  himself  He  records  it  in  both  forms ;  and  a 
sufficient  explanation  is  found  in  the-intention  of  the  two 
passages.  The  mode  of  ascension  was  exquisitely  ap- 
propriate. His  speaking  with  them — blessing  them,  and 
then  rising  from  them  till  a  cloud  enfolds  him,  concealing 
him  from'their  sight.  The  words  of  the  angels,  also,  to 
the  gazing  disciples  sanction  the  church's  attitude  of  ex- 
pectationT  And  he  said  that  true  waiting  is  to  work  as 
well  as  to  wait. 


Date  Due 

I1S4  %. 

F  8-  ud 

1 

! 

f. 

